The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Scott Ryan) took the chair at 12:00, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
Each box represents a portfolio. Cabinet Ministers are shown in bold type. As a general rule, there is one department in each portfolio. However, there is a Department of Human Services in the Social Services portfolio and a Department of Veterans' Affairs in the Defence portfolio. The title of a department does not necessarily reflect the title of a minister in all cases. Assistant Ministers in italics are designated as Parliamentary Secretaries under the Ministers of State Act 1952.
That Senator Stoker be appointed as a member of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, pursuant to the Intelligence Services Act 2001 .
(1) That the Senate:
(a) notes with alarm:
(i) the crisis that has unfolded in Menindee Lakes over the summer with unprecedented fish deaths,
(ii) the Productivity Commission report into the implementation of the Murray Darling Basin Plan,
(iii) the findings of the South Australian Murray Darling Basin Royal Commission, and
(iv) the 1500GL cap on water buybacks for environmental watering,
(b) is of the opinion that the 1500GL cap on water buybacks be repealed;
and
(2) That so much of standing order 111 be suspended, as would prevent Senator Pratt moving that the following bill be introduced at 6 pm today:
A Bill for an Act to amend the Water Act 2007, and for related purposes.
(b) is of the opinion that the 1500GL cap on water buybacks be repealed; …
There will be regional communities right across the Murray-Darling Basin who would be very worried about that, because they see buybacks as killing communities.
You can make a very good case for saying it was started perhaps a year later than it should have been, or 18 months later than it should have been.
It's about this nation saying to the world we are a generous open hearted people taking more refugees on a per capita basis than any nation except Canada, we have a proud record of welcoming people from 140 different nations.
But we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.
'Were you aware of the raids prior to them occurring, and did you speak to any journalists prior to the raids?' They have all responded no.
The sub judice convention is a restriction on debate which the Senate imposes upon itself, whereby debate is avoided which could involve a substantial danger of prejudice to proceedings before a court …
The convention … is interpreted and applied by the chair and by the Senate according to circumstances.
in the sense of either creating an atmosphere where a jury would be unable to deal fairly with the evidence put before it—
witness in the giving of evidence …
… … …
It would be an undue restriction on the freedom of the Senate to debate matters of public interest if debate were to be restrained simply on the basis that matters may come before a court in the future.
That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance and the Public Service (Senator Cormann) and the Minister for Small and Family Business, Skills and Vocational Education (Senator Cash) to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance and the Public Service (Senator Cormann) to a question without notice asked by Senator Di Natale today relating to climate change.
That the Senate records its deep sorrow at the death on 9 December 2018 of the Hon. Gordon Scholes AO, a former member of the House of Representatives for the division of Corio, Speaker of the House in the Whitlam government and Minister for Defence and Minister for Territories in the Hawke government; places on record its gratitude for his service to the parliament and the nation; and extends its deepest sympathies to his family in their bereavement.
That the Senate records its deep sorrow at the death on 9 February 2019 of Mr Bernard 'Barney' Cooney, a former senator for Victoria, places on record its gratitude for his long service to the parliament and the nation, and extends its sincere sympathies to the family in their bereavement.
Everybody knows Senator Cooney because he is the most gracious man who greets every new member and makes them feel so much at home.
Courtesy and grace are forever needed in debate. A civil society cannot be at its best unless its constituents treat each other civilly.
I think the real reason is all of us in Parliament have got a mixture of politician and parliamentarian, and Barney's got the highest portion of the latter that I've come across.
They'd come to the door, knock on the door, and ask for something to eat and something to drink. The sort of thing, I suppose, that Henry Lawson used to describe in his story. She would always give them work if she could, chopping the wood, that gave them dignity and she'd always give them supper, no matter who they were, because they were human beings and in many cases they were return soldiers from World War I and many of the younger ones were going to be soldiers in World War II. That was always a lesson to me, that no matter who you were, you were entitled to be treated in a particular way.
The more they can be effectively equipped with power the more likely it is that their social distress will be abated and the community as a whole benefit.
What happens with legislation is that it creeps. You cannot look at legislation simply in terms of what is happening now, you have to look at what might happen later on. Once you proscribe an organisation, people say ‘that’s how things are done’. What was put in as an exception originally becomes the precedent for more and more power to be given to the executive, and that is a real problem.
Dad died peacefully in his sleep on Saturday, 9 February 2019. His sister Jane was by his side which was fitting as she was there at his birth and was reading traditional Irish stories to him just before he passed. Although most of dad's mainly Irish forebears lived in Tasmania for several generations, one dating back to the 1820s, Dad still lived the old Irish stories.'
Barney spent the last couple of years of his life in an aged care centre. One of the carers at the centre told the family that Barney never spoke about himself. But Barney knew the names of every carer and always knew something about them or their families. That's typical of Barney, his whole life was spent thinking about the wellbeing of others before his own. Even when things weren't going great for him as the final couple of years were not easy for him.
Dad was a creature of habit and would go to the same stores at the Victoria market every time he went there. He'd always chat to the storeowners about how they were going, how their families were going and the state of their businesses. It always put a smile on their face every time he would turn up to their stores. Dad hasn't been able to get to the Victoria market for a while now and it appears that we have inherited the same habits as Dad as we go to the same shops as he used to go to. Although he hasn't been there for a few years now they still ask after him every time.
Just before Christmas in 2018, we took dad and mum to Anglesea, a rare visit for them in recent times. Mum and dad used to take us there all the time when we were growing up. Running and swimming on the beach, having the traditional Australian barbeques and bush walks. They were great times that dad's children, Sean, Justin, Megan and Jerome will never forget. Dad and mum, and their children would've loved for the youngest sibling, Geraldine, to be there, also.
Barney's grandchildren have this to say about him: Granddad was a great man. His tenacious upholding of personal values is inspiring to us. However, nothing defined his character more than his unique ability to provide unconditional love and kindness to those close to him. Demonstrative of this he used to come and watch the grandkids swimming each week at Melbourne University. This became increasingly difficult for him but he'd turn up each week and take the grandkids for donuts and muffins afterwards.
Dad played footy in his youth, and loved South Melbourne where he grew up as a teenager. However, when they moved to Sydney and transformed into the flashy Sydney Swans complete with dancing girls this was too much for him. Dad decided to support a local club so he changed allegiances to Fitzroy. Like the old South Melbourne, Fitzroy were not team that featured often in the finals. Soon after, Fitzroy moved to Brisbane and became the Brisbane Lions. After that Dad gave up supporting a club. Some say it was a matter of principle for him that he couldn't support a team that was not local but we think it was more to do with the success the Brisbane Lions had winning back to back grand finals which didn't sit well with his support for the underdogs on and off the field.
We've heard a lot about dad's principles and decency and kindness, but dad was also a practical man. In September 1987, dad trekked out to Waverley Park with this family to watch the VFL Preliminary Final between Hawthorn and Melbourne. This match has gone down in history due to a rare error from the great Melbourne Irish import, Jim Stynes.
The final moments of the game went something like this:
Gary Buckenara from Hawthorn received a free kick, 55 metres out. Although a good kick, 55 metres was probably beyond him. The siren went. Game over. Except for the crowd waiting for the free kick. He lined up, the crowded stadium on the edge of their seats. Buckenara needed to kick the goal for Hawthorn to win. Then, in one of the great moments in finals history, Jim Stynes accidently gave away a 15 metres penalty which put Buckenara 40 metres out. It was Hawthorn—and not Melbourne—that advanced to the Grand Final that year.
And where was Barney and his family when this historic drama unfolded .... they were already in the car headed back home as dad wanted to leave early to beat the traffic.
Power corrupts; lack of power corrodes absolutely. People who are powerless to give at least minimum expression to their needs are at risk of being rendered hopeless, desperate, alienated, physically ill, mentally ill, or a combination of two or more of those things.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Abetz from 12 February to 14 February 2019, for personal reasons.
That the Senate—
(a) notes the heartbreak and loss suffered by the residents of the Townsville region following the record breaking floods last week and expresses its support and understanding;
(b) further notes the magnificent efforts of the Australian Defence Force and Emergency Service Workers, Police, Council staff, all other agencies and individuals involved in protecting life and property during the floods and the subsequent clean-up and expresses the gratitude and support of the Parliament and the Australian people; and
(c) acknowledges and applauds the selfless and compassionate actions of:
(i) the great "tinnie navy" of ordinary folk who rescued residents as well as their pets from rising waters at all hours of the day and night,
(ii) the masses of Townsville residents who have donated clothing, food, money and household items,
(iii) the local businesses who put their hands in their pocket to boost the flood appeal by more than $1m,
(iv) the volunteers who assisted at drop-off centres, and
(v) the mud army tackling the mould and grime.
That the Senate notes that:
The South Australian Royal Commission into the Murray-Darling Basin has recently reported to the South Australian governor and the commissioner made 44 recommendations to address the ill health and mismanagement of the basin.
The Senate calls on the government to adopt the recommendations in full.
Ministers of State (Checks for Security Purposes) Bill 2019
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to provide for security background checks of Ministers of State, and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
MINISTERS OF STATE (CHECKS FOR SECURITY PURPOSES) BILL 2019
The purpose of the Ministers of State (Checks for Security Purposes) Bill 2019 is to ensure that the Prime Minister is fully informed of any security issues that may arise from the personal background and circumstances of persons who have been appointed as Ministers of State including Assistant Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries.
Ministers of State occupy positions of the highest trust within the Australian Government. Cabinet Ministers are privy to the most sensitive decisions and information, including the highest levels of national security classified information. Other Ministers, Assistant Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries also have routine access to highly sensitive information including national security information.
Ministers of State are currently exempt from the security checking and clearance processes that apply to all Australian Government personnel who are allowed access to sensitive and security classified government information. Security checking and clearance requirements apply to the staff of Ministers, but not to Ministers themselves.
This Bill seeks to strengthen security at the highest levels of the Australian Government. While avoiding subjecting Ministers to a security clearance process that would override the Prime Minister's independent decisions on Ministerial appointments, the Bill will ensure that the Prime Minister has access to relevant security information relating to Ministers of State.
Security information relating to Ministers, conveyed in the form of reports by the Director-General of Security, will provide the Prime Minister with confidence that comprehensive checks have been made to identify any possible security issues that might affect a Minister's ability to perform their duties including maintaining Cabinet confidentiality and protecting other sensitive and national security classified information.
In the event that security background checks reveal an issue of security concern, the Prime Minister will be free to determine what steps might be required to resolve the matter.
Implementation of such a scheme would address a significant gap in Australia's Protective Security Framework. In this the Bill supports the objectives of recent legislation relating to espionage and foreign interference in Australia and will provide the Parliament and the Australian public greater assurance that security will be maintained at the highest levels of the Australian Government.
The current Australian Protective Security Policy Framework observes that "access to sensitive and security classified information necessitates a high level of assurance of a person's integrity. This is due to the potential harm associated with compromise of that information."
A key component of Australian Government protective security arrangements is the requirement that persons with ongoing access to sensitive or security classified information or material must be security cleared at an appropriate level.
The Australian Protective Security Policy Framework sets out four levels of security clearance checking, each involving more rigorous checking:
B aseline Vetting for access to classified information up to and including the PROTECTED level;
Negative Vetting Level 1 for access to classified information up to and including the SECRET level;
Negative Vetting Level 2 for access to classified information up to and including the TOP SECRET level.; and
Positive Vetting for access to information at all classification levels, including certain types of caveated and codeword information.
Negative Vetting Level 2 checking includes verification of identity, confirmation of Australian citizenship and status of any other citizenships, a background check covering residences, employment and other personal details over the previous 10 years, an official secrets declaration and a statutory declaration covering the provision of information, referee checks, a digital footprint check, a national police records check, a comprehensive financial statement and financial history check, a security assessment ASIO, and a security interview.
Positive Vetting includes the same checks as Negative Vetting Level 2 with the addition of a background check covering more than 10 years from the age of 16, additional financial checking with supporting documentation, a financial probity check, and a psychological assessment.
The security clearance process, applied to many thousands of Australian public servants, Australian Defence Force personnel, law enforcement personnel, government contractors and state and territory government personnel whose duties require access to sensitive or national security classified Australian Government information is an essential foundation for the Australian Government's protective security framework including the investigation of foreign espionage and interference activities.
It is also the case, however, that the current Australian Protective Security Policy Framework identifies certain Australian office holders who are not required to hold a security clearance to access security classified information while exercising the duties of their office.
These office holders include Members and Senators of the Commonwealth Parliament and members of the Federal Executive Council.
Under this policy Ministers of State are excluded from security clearance requirements by virtue of their status as Members of Parliament and as members of the Federal Executive Council.
The exemption from security clearances for Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries was first publicly acknowledged in answers given by the then Attorney-General, the Hon Daryl Williams MP, to questions on notice asked in the House of Representatives in 2002. However no explanation was given for this policy which appears to date back to the beginning of the Australian Government's security clearance system in the 1940s.
Minister of State, it appears, have always been taken on trust.
The current Australian Protective Security Policy Framework advances no reasons to support this policy.
In contrast the Government of Canada conducts security background checks in relation to Federal Ministers.
This policy was introduced by the Conservative Government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper in a context of concerns about foreign espionage and interference in Canada. The policy has continued under the Liberal Government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. This policy appears to be broadly accepted as compatible with longstanding ministerial and parliamentary conventions.
The Canadian Privy Council Office (the secretariat of the federal Cabinet of Canada) arranges for security background checks to be conducted in relation to Members of Parliament who are being considered by the Prime Minister for appointment as Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries.
The Privy Council Office has indicated that the security background checking process entails records checks with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, a check with the Canada Revenue Agency regarding tax compliance, and a check with the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy regarding bankruptcy and insolvency.
Prospective Canadian Government Ministers are required to provide the Privy Council Office with extensive personal information including financial disclosures. Security interviews are also conducted.
The arrangements for security checking Canadian Ministers are informal and ultimately at the discretion of the Prime Minister. In 2015 Prime Minister Harper directed that Ministerial security checks be renewed every two years.
Canadian security practice highlights how it is highly anomalous that Australian Ministers of State, office holders who participate in the highest levels of executive government decision making and who have access to some of the most sensitive and highly classified government information, should be exempt from a mandatory security background checking process.
The number of persons appointed as Ministers of State in the Australian Government is significant.
143 people have been appointed as a Ministers of State (variously designated as Prime Minister, Minister, Assistant Minister or Parliamentary Secretary) since the appointment of the first Rudd Ministry was sworn in on 3 December 2007. Of these 143 people, 68 were in Labor Ministries and 75 were in Coalition Ministries.
It can be reasonably assumed that similar numbers will be appointed over the next decade.
Regrettably it cannot be assumed that persons appointed as Ministers will always be free of characteristics, activities, associations, connections or obligations that may compromise, or risk compromise of national security within the executive government.
Recent experience concerning non-compliance by Members of Parliament with constitutional requirements for election to the Commonwealth Parliament show that party preselection processes, electoral and media scrutiny as well as selection to serve in the Ministry cannot be relied on to identify and resolve matters that would be an issue in a security background checking process.
Instances of corruption involving Australian political figures including Ministers and Members of Parliament at the State and Federal levels show that Ministers may succumb to temptations that may make them vulnerable to compromise. Over the past decade issues have also arisen relating to the involvement of Members of Parliament including Ministers and Shadow Ministers with foreign persons and organisations that have raised security issues. There are numerous examples in a range of overseas jurisdictions of parliamentarians, including Ministers, who have been compromised by foreign intelligence services or have otherwise engaged in activities highly prejudicial to the national security of their country. It would be naïve to think the Australian Ministers of State will always be immune from such failings.
A security checking process for Ministers of State should not involve a potential administrative veto over the appointment of Ministers or their continuance in office.
Recognising the special position of democratically elected Members of Parliament, this Bill provides for the establishment of a mandatory security background checking process to provide information to the Prime Minister and thereby ensure that the Prime Minister is fully informed of any security issues that may arise from the personal background and circumstances of persons who have been appointed as Ministers of State.
This process will apply to persons who have been appointed as Ministers of State including Assistant Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries. It would not apply to Members of Parliament generally, only to those appointed to Ministerial office in the executive government and who have ongoing access to highly sensitive and national security classified information.
The security checking process would involve the preparation of reports by the Director-General of Security on any matters relating to security that arise from a comprehensive examination of the personal background and circumstances of Ministers.
Such reports would be solely for the information of the Prime Minister and would be subject to strict security arrangements.
The preparation of reports on security matters would not constitute a security clearance in the form of those applied to Australian Government personnel and other persons under the Australian Protective Security Policy Framework and would not constitute a security assessment made under Part IV of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (ASIO Act).
Rather, reports would be available solely for the confidential information of the Prime Minister who would be free to respond however he or she considered appropriate. Matters concerning the appointment of Ministers, their duties and the composition of the Ministry would remain matters of political judgment for the Prime Minister. However those judgments and decisions would be informed by comprehensive and reliable information relating to security.
The Bill proposes that reports relating to security will be prepared by the Director-General of Security, rather than another agency such as the Australian Government Security Vetting Agency which provides centralised vetting services for most government departments and agencies. This is most appropriate given the particular sensitivity of this task and the statutory provisions that govern the independent and apolitical work of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation.
The roles of the Director-General of Security and ASIO proposed in this Bill are within ASIO's statutory function set out in paragraph 17(1) (a) of the ASIO Act "to obtain, correlate and evaluate intelligence relevant to security".
Also of relevance is section 29 of the ASIO Act which sets out the special responsibility of the Director-General of Security to ensure that ASIO's work is strictly limited to what is necessary for the purposes of the discharge of its functions, and to ensure that ASIO "is kept free from any influences or considerations not relevant to its functions and nothing is done that might lend colour to any suggestion that it is concerned to further or protect the interests of any particular section of the community, or with any matters other than the discharge of its functions."
The Bill does not limit the ability of the Prime Minister to seek and obtain security advice from the Director-General of Security at any time relating to Ministers or persons who may be under consideration for possible appointment as a Minister. A Prime Minister may or may not choose to seek such advice prior to recommending a person to the Governor-General for appointment as a Minister of State. This will remain a matter for the discretion of the Prime Minister. It should also be recognised that the formation of a new Ministry and the appointment of new Ministers may take place very quickly and that time may not be available for any consultation between the Prime Minister and the Director-General of Security concerning any security issues relating to possible ministerial appointees.
The Bill will establish a mandatory requirement for the Prime Minister to direct the Director-General of Security to provide reports on matters relating to security that arise from examination of the personal background and circumstances of persons appointed as Ministers of State. The Prime Minister will be obliged to issue such directions within 14 days of the appointment of a Minister (and from the commencement of the Act) and the Director-General will be required to furnish a report to the Prime Minister within 120 days.
The Bill requires the Director-General to obtain information and undertake inquiries that are equivalent to the information and inquiries required for security purposes of ASIO employees.
In practice this will involve inquiries and information gathering equivalent to that required for Positive Vetting to allowaccess to information and resources at all classification levels, including certain types of caveated and codeword information. This level of investigation and checking would be appropriate for Ministers of State given their access to the most sensitive and highest levels of classified information.
The security checking proposed by this Bill would inevitably involve intrusive inquiries into the personal background and circumstances of Ministers of State. While some Ministers may find this uncomfortable it should be accepted as part of their ministerial duty and a necessary measure to protect national security. However it should be emphasised that the resultant reports will be required to only contain information and advice that is strictly relevant to security as defined in the ASIO Act.
The Bill also contains provisions for the safeguarding of reports and requires the Director-General of Security to ensure that reports are properly secured and that reports and all information obtained in the course of making inquiries are only used for the purposes of the Act – that is informing the Prime Minister about security issues relating to Ministers.
The work of the Director-General of Security and ASIO under the provisions of this proposed legislation will also be subject to the oversight role of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security under the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986 .
Overall, the Ministers of State (Checks for Security Purposes) Bill 2019 will strengthen protective security within Australia's executive government by ensuring that the Prime Minister is fully informed of any security issues arising from the background and circumstances of Ministers. Persons who wish to be considered for possible appointment to Ministerial office will be clearly and transparently forewarned of the background security checking process they will be subject to and assured that checking process will be undertaken by the Director-General of Security in completely confidential and apolitical circumstances.
Security at the highest levels of the Australian Government should never be compromised. This Bill will plug a major gap in Australia's protective security framework.
Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2019
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to re-establish confidence in the banking system, to separate retail commercial banking activities involving the holding of deposits from wholesale and investment banking involving risky activities, and for other purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Hayne Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry has highlighted the necessity for banks to be limited to their core industry.
The vertical integration of the banks providing additional services including financial advice, insurance and superannuation have been shown to be the root cause of rorts, over charging and profit gouging.
Australia's best-known finance commentator Alan Kohler wrote in The Australian on 3 December 2018 and I quote:
I have been opening a random sample of the 10,140 submissions — just short ones from individuals. Without exception they called for the banks to be broken up and most of them, surprisingly, used the term 'Glass-Steagall' – suggesting that the now-repealed American law that used to forcibly separate banking from insurance and investment banking be introduced into Australia.
Alan Kohler stated further:
That would certainly be a fertile field for the Royal Commissioner to plough, although most of the banks have already announced plans to break themselves up along those lines so perhaps such a recommendation would lack drama.
Unlike most commentators and politicians, however, Kohler is not totally fooled by these moves from the banks that appear as if they are separating voluntarily.
Continuing, he made the following very important point:
But Westpac says it will keep its insurance and wealth management division and AMP and Macquarie have not announced any plans to get rid of their banks, so an Australian version of Glass-Steagall would make it uniform and would make sure they didn't slide back into their bad old 'one stop shop' ways in future.
Kohler now joins the ranks of other notable Australian experts who have endorsed the Glass-Steagall option.
In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, Don Argus, former CEO of National Australia Bank and former Chairman of BHP, said in The Australian on 17 September 2011 and I quote:
People are lashing out and creating all sorts of regulation, but the issue is whether they're creating the right regulation … What has to be done is to separate commercial banking from investment banking.
Former ANZ director John Dahlsen wrote in the Australian Financial Review on 21 August 2018 and I quote:-
Problems in banking will not be solved until the structure is changed ... With barriers removed it is possible that banks and the investment market will move to unlock shareholder value in structural separation, following the principle of the US Glass-Steagall Act, which kept commercial and retail banking separate. Voluntary demergers would threaten the gravy train of 'coupon clipping' for fee extraction, but enforced separation in Australia seems inevitable...
Former ACCC chairman Professor Alan Fels was quoted in The Australian on 9 August 2018 and again I quote:
There are a number of serious structural issues that need to be considered, the first and most obvious is the separation of the activity of creating financial products and then offering so-called independent advisory services to customers on what are the best products. A second very important one is whether there should be a structural separation between traditional banking activities and the more risky investment activities … Banks benefit from the implicit guarantee on their deposit liabilities which flows into their trading activities.
Banking expert Martin North of Digital Finance Analytics stated in his submission to the Interim Report of the Royal Commission:
The large players are too big to fail and too complex to manage, and need to be broken apart. A modern Glass-Steagall separation would achieve this, and is proven to reduce risk, and drive better customer outcomes and right-size our finance sector.
Former APRA Principal Researcher Dr Wilson Sy recommended in his submission to the Royal Commission:
The financial system should be structurally separated to simplify regulation, increase competition and innovation, and better serve the community.
The Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018, previously introduced by the Honourable Bob Katter MP in the House of Representatives but since lapsed, is being introduced by Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party into the Senate due to my party's ongoing commitment to overcome the systemic failure in our banking system and, more importantly, in bank management per se.
The Australian population are appalled at the bad behaviour of bank management.
The quest for greater profits to the detriment of their own depositors is disgraceful.
The quest for greater bonuses has transcended into pressure on staff throughout the banking system to push their depositors into taking that bank's financial services advice which results in those depositors taking out related company insurance and superannuation policies without concern as to their suitability.
Of course, the epitome of that bad behaviour is taking fees from estates of deceased persons.
The Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2019 will put in place a banking system that, I hope, will prevent a repetition of the history being aired before the Hayne Royal Commission.
I commend this Bill to the Senate.
Broadcasting Services Amendment (Audio Description) Bill 2019
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Australian Greens wholeheartedly support The Broadcasting Services Amendment Bill 2019 which would ensure broadcasters provide a minimum number of hours of audio description per week.
It is embarrassing that Australia is the only English-speaking nation in the OECD that doesn't offer Audio Description for free-to-air television, lagging behind countries like the UK, US, Canada and New Zealand. This bill gives us the opportunity to remedy that.
Audio description is an accessibility feature that assists people who are blind, vision impaired, or have print, learning, and physical disabilities to enjoy television, film and live performances by describing what is happening as it happens. It can also help people with autism, by explaining the emotions of characters they see on screen.
Free-to-air television broadcasters are already required to caption all news and current affairs programs and any program screened on their primary or main channels between 6am to midnight, unless it's music-only or not in English. It's great that people who are deaf or hearing impaired get to watch the shows they love but why are people who are blind or vision impaired excluded?
This section of the community watches almost as much TV as sighted people. According to a study undertaken by Comcast and the American Foundation for the Blind, 96% of adults with a visual impairment watch TV on a regular basis.
These changes will give people who are blind or have low vision similar access to television services as their families, friends and peers, and give clear legislative guidance to broadcasters as to their obligations to provide audio description.
Television and video content is a significant part of our social and recreational lives and everyone should have the right to access it.
Audio description was introduced on New Zealand television in 2011, the US introduced it in 2010, and the UK has the most developed and regulated laws, with audio description featuring on both free-to-air and subscription channels since 2003. Germany, Austria, Ireland, France, Switzerland and other European countries have also had some audio described programming. Even Australian productions such as Neighbours and Home and Away are produced with audio description for overseas release but this is not a feature available for Australian viewers.
There have been two government-funded audio description trials already conducted – one on ABC1 in 2012 and the other on iView in 2015–16. And then, in 2017 the Government set up an Audio Description Working Group (under the Department of Communications and the Arts) who examined and reported 12 months ago on the options for increasing the availability of audio description services in Australia. And yet, so far, the Government has failed to act on this issue.
This bill has the support and backing of key stakeholders and advocacy bodies in the sector including Vision Australia, Blind Citizens Australia and Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
In addition it is a relatively simple proposition. As with Closed Captions for people who are deaf or hearing impaired, it can be turned on or off as needed. It is also relatively inexpensive to deliver and, in fact, is already integrated into many of the programs that are imported from overseas. Different services currently offer Audio Description at the movies, online, while travelling by plane, at libraries, on DVDs and while using apps. In fact Screen Australia has made it a condition as of 2011 that all Australian-made films it funds have to produce an audio description track.
The Australian Greens don't believe it's acceptable for people who are blind or vision impaired to be excluded in our society. People with disabilities continue to fall through the cracks, to be locked out of the community and denied the same rights as other Australians. Failings of successive Labor and Coalition governments have perpetuated this discrimination, often denying people with disabilities access to services and the supports they need to live a good life, including audio description. We must do better. it's time to allow everyone the right to participate equally in our society, and that includes watching TV, a right that most of us take for granted. I urge the Government and opposition to support this bill.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) independent reviews conducted by the Regional Telecommunications Review Committee, the Productivity Commission and the Australian National Audit Office have all issued critical reports on the Universal Service Obligation (USO),
(ii) the Productivity Commission has found the number of Australian payphones has almost halved over the last decade,
(iii) the Department of Communications and the Arts estimates that 22% of copper services and 9% of payphones have been phased out since 2012,
(iv) Telstra is currently paid almost $300 million a year to maintain these services under the USO,
(v) the Department of Communications and the Arts estimates the equivalent universal broadband delivery obligation on NBNCo for fixed wireless and satellite in regional areas will cost the entity in excess of $800 million per annum, if operating on a full cost-recovery basis, and
(vi) on 5 December 2018, the Minister for Communications and the Arts announced that the Government does not intend to change current USO arrangements, despite the Minister's report stating: "Network Strategies concluded that the delivery of voice services using wireless (mobile and fixed) and satellite technologies would be more cost effective than the current arrangements", and "Potential savings in the hundreds of millions of dollars over the period from 2020 to 2032 were identified"; and
(b) orders that there be laid on the table by the Minister for Communications and the Arts, by midday on 14 February 2019:
(i) the high-level cost modelling of the USO reform options, and
(ii) the advice provided by NBNCo about the financial costs of servicing additional ADSL customers.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) will soon start to phase out this year after the Abbott Government made the decision to discontinue it in 2014,
(ii) hundreds of dwellings will be dropping off the scheme in a matter of months, yet there has been no replacement scheme or extension to the NRAS announced by the Government, and
(iii) many vulnerable people will be left unable to access affordable housing and could face homelessness; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to urgently commit to a replacement scheme or an extension of the NRAS.
That the Senate—
(a) recognises:
(i) the sovereign right of Indigenous Australians to hunt culturally significant species under the Native Title Act 1993 (the Act), and
(ii) while native title was envisaged to maintain this cultural connection, hunting rights under the Act must still be subject to laws which relate to animal cruelty; and
(b) notes that:
(i) the populations of both dugongs and sea turtles have declined significantly over the last 15 years,
(ii) this population decline is due to cumulative pressures, such as ocean acidification, pollution, commercial fishing and other human impacts that include Indigenous hunting,
(iii) protections for dugong and turtle populations from threats of poaching, illegal commercial trade and illegal transportation were supposedly enhanced in 2013 by the tripling of financial penalties for such practices within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park,
(iv) there is little information regarding the number of dugongs and sea turtles killed by hunters, and there have been credible allegations raised within local Indigenous communities of animal cruelty committed by those who purport to be hunting under native title,
(v) such allegations include the use of high-power motorboats, machetes and other cruel methods which maim animals and leave them suffering before dying,
(vi) Indigenous leaders are calling out for help to ensure that culturally significant practices are not undermined by the illegal actions of others,
(vii) several Indigenous clans have adopted sustainable take practices through Traditional Use of Marine Resource Agreements and some have called for zero take of endangered species, and
(viii) in the first sitting week of 2019, Senator Hinch will be introducing a bill to stop the cruel slaughter of endangered creatures, like dugongs and sea turtles.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) the Youth Representative Consultation Report was released in December 2018,
(ii) the report, written by Mr Amos Washington, the 2018 Youth Representative to the United Nations, is the culmination of consultations with thousands of young people across the country and a six-week placement at the Australian Permanent Mission to the United Nations, where the Youth Representative worked on behalf of young Australians,
(iii) the Youth Representative Program provides young Australians with an important platform to have their voices heard around Australia and on the international stage,
(iv) the report identifies mental health and wellbeing, discrimination and inequality, and education as the top issues facing young Australians, and
(v) while the vast majority of young people surveyed are interested in current global events and in learning more about how the government makes decisions, less than one in five of the young people surveyed feel like their opinions are represented by politicians in government;
(b) supports the Youth Representative's efforts to provide young Australians with an opportunity to have their perspectives heard and considered;
(c) recognises the importance of supporting the wellbeing of young Australians;
(d) recognises that young people have perspectives that can enrich policy conversations;
(e) emphasises the need to continually consider how young people can be further involved in policy decision-making; and
(f) commits to:
(i) supporting the Youth Representative Program into the future,
(ii) exploring opportunities for meaningful consultation with young people when creating policy, and
(iii) placing the needs of young Australians at the forefront of policymaking.
That the Senate—
(a) takes note of the importance of the fishing industry to the Queensland economy, which was worth $294 million in 2015-16, and the particular significance of this industry to Queensland's coastal towns;
(b) notes the excellent occasion that is the Hervey Bay Seafood Festival, held annually on the second Sunday in August, the only such event in Australia managed by the men and women who catch the seafood;
(c) recognises the positive impact the Hervey Bay Seafood Festival has on the local economy, with over 50% of patrons travelling to Hervey Bay from other areas;
(d) further notes that the team behind the Festival, Hervey Bay Seafood Inc, have also launched 'Wide Bay Wild Catch' – a promotional brand to showcase the story of the resident seafood industry, the men and women across all sectors of seafood in the region from Rainbow Beach north to Bundaberg, and their pride in legendary local seafood for seafood lovers the world over; and the
(e) commends Hervey Bay Seafood Inc for their brilliant work in promoting local seafood products in the Wide Bay region, and for providing another draw point for tourists to the region.
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the recent Maldivian presidential election held on 23 September 2018, and
(ii) that His Excellency Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, candidate for the Maldivian Democratic Party and, as part of a coalition of opposition parties, was victorious as the Maldives' democratically-elected President;
(b) formally extends its congratulations to His Excellency Ibrahim (lbu) Mohamed Solih on his election as President of the Republic of Maldives; and
(c) acknowledges the desire of The Maldives to be re-admitted to the Commonwealth of Nations.
Competition and Consumer Amendment (Prevention of Exploitation of Indigenous Cultural Expressions) Bill 2019
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 to prevent unfair practices in the supply of goods that exhibit Indigenous cultural expressions, and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and now be read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
I rise today to speak in favour of the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Prevention of Exploitation of Indigenous Cultural Expressions) Bill 2019. The profile of Indigenous art has grown tremendously in recent decades. This has resulted in earning and income opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and contributed to both the preservation and dissemination of culture. This rise in awareness and value of Indigenous art has also led to a growing market in fake art and merchandise.
These commercially-produced goods – mostly aimed at the tourist market – are often made from non-traditional materials and feature inauthentic and culturally inappropriate designs. This trade misappropriates Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, undermining the role of communities. It denies Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists economic and other opportunities as well as deceiving and misleading buyers.
The main purpose of this legislation is to ensure an end to the proliferation of fake Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art and art products. It creates a a legislative solution which makes it an offence to supply or offer commercial goods to a consumer that include Indigenous cultural expression unless it is supplied by, or in accordance with a transparent arrangement with an Indigenous artist or relevant Indigenous community.
If this parliament were to agree to this bill and pass it into law, they will be supporting artists like Banduk Marika, who said that,
" The ecosystem, the environment we live in is full of natural resources. Our art is our resource, it belongs to us, we use it in a ceremonial context; it is a resource for our survival. If control of that resource is taken away from us, we cannot meet our cultural obligations; we cannot use it for our families ' benefit. Exploiting our resource needs to be negotiated on our terms, we need to have control of how that ' s done "
I put it to the Senate that it is time to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island artists and communities and end the exploitation of Indigenous Cultural Expression.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology, by no later than 3pm on 13 February 2019: any correspondence between the Prime Minister and the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology regarding the Australian Complementary Medicine industry.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) Micah, a movement of Australian Christians, churches and organisations, are raising their voices for a world free from poverty – this week hundreds of Christian delegates from across our country gathered in Parliament House for 'Voices for Justice 2018', to share their concern for the world's poor, oppressed and displaced and to advocate for doing more for the world's poorest, those trapped in slavery and the displaced,
(ii) significant progress has been made in recent decades as the world increased its focus on the problems of global poverty, however, these gains are fragile as climate change, conflicts and governance concerns are threatening to push more people into poverty and vulnerability and undo the progress to this point, and
(iii) since September 2013, the Australian International Development Assistance budget has been reduced by the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government, and is now at 0.22% of gross national income; and
(b) calls upon the Federal Government to consider the voices of the Micah delegates and their concerns about the need for investment in a global response to ending the desperate impact of poverty.
That the Senate—
(a) acknowledges that ASIO and Australian Federal Police have extensive data on the country-of-origin of potential extremists;
(b) notes that, in other issues in relation to the immigration system, when rorts and problems are identified from certain countries, the tap is turned off; and
(c) calls on the Federal Government to introduce a travel ban, similar to that imposed by the Trump administration in the United States of America, on people from countries that are known sources of radicalism coming into Australia.
The Senate divided. [17:08]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) acknowledges that:
(i) male suicides increase significantly over Christmas, and
(ii) discriminatory aspects of Australia's family law system, which acts to separate children from parents and grandparents at Christmas time, contribute to this increase; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to take urgent steps to deal with discriminatory aspects of the Australian family law system.
The Senate divided. [17:17]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate calls on the Federal Government to establish a royal commission to inquire into the child support system and the family law system, with the terms of reference to include:
(a) the conduct of lawyers and costs of legal advice;
(b) the adequacy of legal aid and its budget;
(c) the cost of transcripts of court proceedings;
(d) the costs, adequacy and effectiveness of supervised visitation;
(e) the conduct and costs of those providing expert advice including psychologists;
(f) the cost and cause of delays;
(g) the use of courts at night;
(h) the effectiveness and efficiency of the child support system;
(i) suicides related to the child support system and the family law system; and
(j) the experience of children.
The Senate divided. [17:25]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) a six year survey of the Great Australian Bight (the Bight), conducted as part of a joint effort by the South Australian Research and Development Institute, CSIRO, the University of Adelaide, Flinders University and BP, has discovered more than 400 previously unknown species,
(ii) the Bight is one of the most biodiverse places on the planet,
(iii) BP and Equinor's own modelling of an oil spill in the Bight shows the scale of disaster that is possible, and
(iv) Equinor plans to commence drilling in the Bight as early as next year; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to suspend all current oil and gas exploration and drilling licences, and move to ban future oil and gas drilling in the Bight.
The Senate divided: 17:30
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) notes the threat that crocodiles pose to humans, livestock and aquaculture in Central, North and Far North Queensland;
(b) recognises that, whilst it is always an admirable goal to protect and conserve wildlife species, measures to minimise the risk of monetary damage, injury or death to humans should always take precedence – that is, that human lives are more important than crocodiles;
(c) recognises that states and territories are responsible for managing crocodiles, including for public safety; and
(d) calls on states and territories to consider all options for the protection of human lives consistent with national law, including sustainable culls.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) trust in Australian democracy has halved in the last decade, with fewer than 41% of Australian citizens reporting a sense of satisfaction with the way democracy works, down from 86% in 2007, according to research from the Museum of Australian Democracy and the University of Canberra published today,
(ii) women are generally less satisfied with democracy and more distrusting of politicians and political institutions – those most critical of the current state of our democracy are women in their forties who are struggling on less than $50,000 a year,
(iii) people most likely to feel satisfied with the status quo include those aged 55 and over, and those earning more than $200,000 a year,
(iv) the three main grievances electors have with Australia's democratic system are politicians not being accountable for broken promises; politicians not dealing with the issues that really matter; and big business having too much power,
(v) plummeting levels of trust in politics-as-usual is prompting young people to mobilise in unprecedented numbers, with thousands of schoolchildren protesting the Government's lack of long-term policies for climate justice over the last week, across all Australian capitals, and
(vi) younger voters are concerned that their vote does not count because of the overwhelming influence of political donations, which result in more and more people being denied necessary resources and basic human rights; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to:
(i) ban corporate donations from vested interests that seek to influence government policy,
(ii) cap all other donations to political parties to $1000 per year, and
(iii) take measures to increase the participation of women and people from minority backgrounds in Australia's political system.
The Senate divided. [17:44]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the revelations last year of dual citizenship and holding office for profit under the Crown that led to some of those sitting in the Senate to be found to have been ineligible to have been elected,
(ii) that, in some cases, those concerned knew or might reasonably have been expected to know that they were not entitled to claim to be a senator but still continued to sit in the Senate,
(iii) that under the circumstances in which an individual knew that they were not entitled to sit in the Senate but continued to collect a salary and allowances as though they were a senator, they have defrauded the Australian people, and
(iv) that despite being removed from the Senate by order of the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns, some of these individuals who knowingly received remuneration to which they were not entitled are again trying to return to the Senate; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government, in circumstances in which such previously disqualified individuals succeed in returning to the Senate, to impose a garnishee on any remuneration that they would receive as senators in order to recover all salary and allowances previously collected by them for which they had no entitlement.
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the Australian Electoral Commission published figures about political donations received in the 2017-18 financial year on 1 February 2019,
(ii) that voters have the right to know which bodies are donating how much to which political party in the lead up to an election, and
(iii) that transparency in relation to electoral donations is critical to the healthy functioning of democracy; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to:
(i) ban corporate donations from vested interests that seek to influence government policy,
(ii) cap all other donations to political parties to $1000 per year, and
(iii) implement real-time disclosure of donations to political parties.
The Senate divided. [17: 45]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the following matter be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 19 August 2019:
The feasibility of a National Horse Traceability Register for all horses, with particular reference to:
(a) the existence and adequacy of state or industry-based registers;
(b) the benefits of a national register, including for animal welfare, biosecurity safety (including for the prevention and management of Emergency Animal Diseases, such as equine influenza and African Horse Sickness), backyard breeding and the integrity of trade in horses;
(c) overseas models of national tracking systems for horses;
(d) funding, enforcement and penalty implications; and
(e) any related matters.
The Senate divided. [17:53]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) changes to the In Home Childcare Program, including to the hourly rate cap, have had the unintended consequence of leaving hundreds of families with complex childcare needs without affordable childcare which affects their ability to work, attend medical appointments and respite,
(ii) this group includes parents and carers with significant medical problems, including terminal illness and mental health issues, as well as children with developmental delays and severe disabilities, and
(iii) although some of these families have transitioned to the National Disability Insurance Scheme, many have not;
(b) recognises that, although there were problems with the In Home Childcare Program, some families with complex needs are facing a childcare crisis as a result of the changes;
(c) further notes that numerous providers have been forced to close as a result, and a large number of carers have been left without job; and
(d) calls on the Federal Government to provide emergency funding for sufficient childcare subsidies to high-needs families affected by the change and to provide a long-term solution to this issue.
The Senate divided. [17:59]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) recognises that Queensland Agricultural Training Colleges provide vital skills to graduates, and contribute to the viability of the Queensland agricultural sector as a whole, which employs over 57,000 people in the agriculture, forestry and fishing industries and was worth over $19 billion to the State's economy in 2017-18;
(b) notes that the flagship Longreach and Emerald Training Colleges are being shut down after operating for more than 50 years, have helped thousands of graduates to achieve rewarding careers over this time, and that, between the two colleges, they employ over 100 staff;
(c) further notes that the Queensland Labor Government is responsible for the decision to close training colleges;
(d) calls on the Queensland Labor Government to reconsider its decision to close the Longreach and Emerald Queensland Agricultural Training Colleges; and
(e) condemns the Queensland Labor Government for turning its back on $245 million in Federal funding from the Skilling Australians Fund, which would have created 50,000 new apprenticeships in Queensland over the next four years.
The Senate divided. [18:06]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
'The Morrison Government's failure to act on delivering better protections for Australian consumers after voting against a banking royal commission 26 times'
Suffice to say that it is in everyone's interest that we build a better banking system. And that as painful as the process has been, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
First, in almost every case, the conduct in issue was driven not only by the relevant entity's pursuit of profit but also by individuals' pursuit of gain … Providing a service to customers was relegated to second place. Sales became all important. Those who dealt with customers became sellers. And the confusion of roles extended well beyond frontline service staff. Advisers became sellers and sellers became advisers.
… … …
Rewarding misconduct is wrong. Yet incentive, bonus and commission schemes throughout the financial services industry have measured sales and profit, but not compliance with the law and proper standards … rewards have been paid, regardless of whether the sale was made, or profit derived, in accordance with law. Rewards have been paid regardless of whether the person rewarded should have done what they did.
Other agencies certainly have addressed many issues being raised. I think that will more directly impact on the public consciousness of these things, but they are not things that the government was not aware of.
Australia has some of the best banks in the world. It is partly because of our excellent regulatory system and prudent management.
There can be no doubt that the primary responsibility for misconduct in the financial services industry lies with the entities concerned, and … their boards and senior management.
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services report Options for greater involvement by private sector life insurers in worker rehabilitation .
Strong cultural identity enables one to feel proud of themselves, and speaking and maintaining one's language raises self-esteem and enables one to feel good about themselves. Traditional language is important for maintaining strong cultural connections. Where traditional languages have been taken away from communities, a sense of loss, grief and inadequacy develops. To keep communities and generations strong, traditional language being passed from one generation to another is vital.
Tasmania's world heritage area was our Great Barrier Reef, and, like the Great Barrier Reef, it seemed doomed by climate change.
Climate change isn't just happening. It's happening far quicker than has been predicted. Each careful scientific prediction is rapidly overtaken by the horror of profound natural changes that seem to be accelerating, with old predictions routinely outdone by the worsening reality—hotter, colder, wetter, drier, windier, wilder, and ever more destructive.
Leatherwood doesn't handle fire, it takes a couple of hundred years to come back.
… … …
We're never going to see it recover—once it's gone, it's gone.
Consumers are free to choose a private health insurance policy that pays a set benefit regardless of provider, and many insurers offer such products.
There's this very, very strong top-down political pressure on the people remaining within government to approve whatever these developments or logging operations are, and it's very difficult for anyone to give really honest, clear advice anymore … because, quite frankly, if you have kids and a mortgage, you need to keep your job.