
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2021-08-04</date>
    <parliament.no>46</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>7</period.no>
    <chamber>Senate</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;" />
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Wednesday, 4 August 2021</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Scott Ryan)</span> took the chair at 09:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.</span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Line" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Line"> </span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tabling</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Meeting</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind senators that the question may be put on any proposal at the request of any senator.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r6745" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RUSTON</name>
    <name.id>243273</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a first time.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RUSTON</name>
    <name.id>243273</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the bill, allowing it to be considered during this period of sittings.</para></quote>
<para>I table a statement of reasons justifying the need for this bill to be considered during these sittings and seek leave to have the statement incorporated in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The statement read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 2021 SPRING SITTINGS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">TREASURY LAWS AMENDMENT (COVID-19 ECONOMIC RESPONSE NO. 2) BILL 2021</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Purpose of the Bill</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The purpose of the Bill is to implement a number of urgent measures in response to the ongoing COVID ‑19 pandemic, including to:</para></quote>
<list>Amend the Payments and Benefits Act to allow the Treasurer to make rules for economic response payments to provide support to an entity where they are adversely affected by restrictions imposed by a State or Territory to control COVID-19. This measure gives effect to the Government's commitment to assist any state that is unable to administer its own business support payments in the event of a significant lockdown imposed by a State or Territory between 1 July 2021 and 31 December 2022;</list>
<list>Amends the information sharing provisions of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (TAA 1953) to allow the ATO to share data with Australian government agencies for the purpose of administering a relevant COVID-19 business support program;</list>
<list>Introduces a new power in the income tax laws that enables, by legislative instrument, eligible Commonwealth COVID-19 business grants to be declared free from income tax;</list>
<list>Bill extends the operation of a temporary mechanism introduced in 2020 which permits responsible Ministers to allow for electronic signature for relevant documents, in response to the challenges posed by the Coronavirus pandemic; and</list>
<list>Makes Commonwealth COVID-19 disaster payments received by individuals from the 2020-21 income year tax free.</list>
<quote><para class="block">Reasons for Urgency</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Introduction and swift passage of the Bill is required to facilitate urgent financial support to businesses and households that have been adversely affected by public health orders imposed by State and Territory governments as a measure to minimise the spread of COVID-19 through the community.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(Circulated by authority of the Treasurer)</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>2</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RUSTON</name>
    <name.id>243273</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">As they have done throughout this crisis, the Morrison Government is committed to assisting businesses and individuals through the COVID-19 Pandemic. The Bill will enable the Government to support individuals and businesses that are impacted by significant lockdowns caused by COVID-19.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 1 to the Bill amends the <inline font-style="italic">Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Bill 2020</inline> to allow the Treasurer to make rules for economic response payments to provide support to an entity where they are adversely affected by restrictions imposed by a State or Territory to control COVID-19.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 2 to the Bill amends the <inline font-style="italic">Taxation Administration Act</inline> to allow the ATO to share data with Australian Government agencies, both federal and state, for the purpose of administering only relevant COVID-19 business support program payments.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 3 to the Bill amends the <inline font-style="italic">Income Tax Assessment Act 1997</inline> to introduce a new power to make eligible Commonwealth COVID-19 business grants free from income tax.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">States and territories are already able to apply to the Commonwealth for the same tax treatment where they have grant programs focussed on supporting small and medium businesses facing exceptional circumstances.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 4 to the Bill will reinstate the operation of a temporary mechanism put in place during the COVID-19 Pandemic that has now lapsed, which allows information and documentary requirements between Government and businesses to be altered. This includes requirements to give information to Government in writing and produce, witness and sign documents.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Given the ongoing impacts and physical limitations imposed by COVID-19, there is still a clear need for these provisions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This measure provides that a responsible Minister may determine that provisions in Commonwealth legislation containing particular information or documentary requirements can be varied; do not apply; or prescribe that another provision specified in the determination applies, for a specified time period. A responsible Minister must not exercise the power unless they are satisfied that the determination is in response to circumstances relating to COVID-19.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The mechanism is temporary and will be repealed at the end of</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">31 December 2022. Any determination made under the mechanism will also cease to operate when the temporary mechanism is repealed.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 5 to the Bill amends the income tax law to make Commonwealth COVID 19 disaster payments received by individuals from the 2020-21 income year onwards non-assessable non-exempt income.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This change will provide additional support to individuals receiving COVID-19 disaster payments by making these payments free from tax.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Full details of the measures are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor will support the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021, but let's be in no doubt about why we're having to deal with this bill now, why millions of Australians across New South Wales and Queensland are subject to lockdowns and why we're sitting in the parliament with particularly strict restrictions. It's because of the failure of this government and, in particular, the Prime Minister to do their job—two jobs, specifically: to get the vaccine rollout right, in a speedy and effective way, and to fix the national quarantine system.</para>
<para>These failures are costing Australians every day. The economy is bleeding hundreds of millions of dollars a day and billions of dollars each week, all thanks to the Prime Minister's failures. This is the stark price that is being paid by workers and businesses, particularly small businesses, for the Prime Minister's incompetence. And it's not only been incompetence; it's been dangerous complacency and a complete failure to take responsibility. How many times did the Prime Minister say that it wasn't a race and that it wasn't a competition? What about the government designating aged-care workers as being in the phase 1a category but who still haven't been fully vaccinated? And then, after months of the Prime Minister failing to take responsibility for these failures, it was the fault of the Europeans, then it was ATAGI's fault and then he grudgingly apologised. Even then, at first, it was apologising for not meeting the marks the government had hoped to achieve. Finally, we had the Prime Minister saying he takes responsibility for the early setbacks in the vaccination program.</para>
<para>Now we see the Prime Minister invoking Olympic-level rhetoric—gold medal runs; a triple gold, apparently. It's all well and good to invoke the spirit of inspiration that we've been seeing on our television screens for the last few days, but it's something else to be running a race where we've deliberately been left on the starting blocks or swimming with weights around our legs, thanks to incompetence and complacency and a failure to take responsibility.</para>
<para>Where do we find ourselves right now? Based on the latest data as of 2 August, just under 12.6 million vaccine doses have been administered. So 19.7 per cent of the eligible population, Australians aged 16 and over, are fully vaccinated or, put another way, 15.8 per cent of the total population are fully vaccinated. If we're running a race, based on these statistics we're falling way behind. We're close to last in the OECD, and that's no exception when it came to the vaccine rollout.</para>
<para>Now we hope that we can get to the targets that have been outlined by the government through the work done by the Doherty institute. Based on the information we have seen, we should have the supply required to get us to the 80 per cent target by the end of the year. As the national plan to transition Australia's national COVID response points out, there should be measures to encourage uptake through incentives as part of phase B. Labor agree, and it's why we have called on the government to provide a payment of $300 for every fully vaccinated Australian. That would provide a further incentive to get two vaccine doses and deliver much-needed stimulus for businesses and workers at the end of this year. Unfortunately, as is the government's approach, out of sheer political arrogance they will refuse to take up any useful or good ideas that they didn't come up with.</para>
<para>I've seen the Prime Minister in the last day talk about or seek to lecture on fiscal responsibility and the need to be cautious with our spending. I would say in response to those comments that I don't think the Prime Minister is in any position to lecture anybody about fiscal responsibility considering he is the architect of the slush funds and the rorts that we have seen embedded in this budget. That's not just since he's been Prime Minister. When he became Treasurer, he cottoned on pretty quickly to how to hide money in the budget—billions of unallocated dollars that he could use to buy seats, to buy elections. This is the legacy of this Prime Minister. We won't be taking any lectures about fiscal responsibility from a group that spent $660 million on car parks, targeting particular electorates they want to win, including four in the Treasurer's own electorate. These are the two holders of the purse strings and this is what they're doing. They're doing it with their eyes open, knowing exactly how they're spending taxpayer funds.</para>
<para>We would argue rewarding people for doing the right thing, incentivising those who might be weighing up getting vaccinated, is a very good use of public funds. It's much better than rorting through spreadsheets, rorting through maps, rorting through car parks, rorting through sports grants or rorting through whatever you want to choose. That's how this government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars. So we won't be taking lectures about that. How about we use public funds for the public good? There's an idea. That's exactly what Labor's idea is about—incentivising. It is urgent that we get people vaccinated as soon as possible. That is clear from the Doherty institute modelling and, indeed, from the economic impact analysis released by Treasury yesterday, which put the cost of our slowness in getting vaccinated based on lack of supply in dollar terms. What Treasury have found is that on a 50 per cent vaccination rate and based on the assumptions outlined in this paper the direct economic cost of minimising cases and keeping the cases low is estimated to be about $570 million a week. At 60 per cent, it's around $430 million per week. Once we get to 70 per cent, the costs come down considerably, as do the restrictions placed on people. At 80 per cent, it's still costing around $140 million per week, according to Treasury. So these are the figures. These show you the economic cost—and they don't include the fiscal cost—of the 'strollout' and where we are now. The figure we have today is that just under 20 per cent of the eligible population is vaccinated. By the time we get to 50 per cent, it's still costing $570 million per week to manage this pandemic. So it is urgent. It is important that we incentivise and try to get to these targets as quickly as possible within the supply constraints that have been foisted on this country by the Prime Minister's failure to secure enough vaccine deals and enough vaccines last year when those negotiations were underway. Where many other countries saw the urgency and the need to have a number of vaccine deals, Australia took a very different approach. That is why we are where we are today.</para>
<para>Coupled with those failures on vaccines, we have failures on quarantine. We've seen 27 leaks from hotel quarantine, leading to the mass disruption we are seeing across the country, despite the government knowing and being given advice by the Halton review last year that fit-for-purpose quarantine facilities should be considered to reduce the risk of leaks from hotel quarantine. As we found out at the COVID committee last week, some work is now being done—but only since July—on additional quarantine facilities. It is hard to believe that Finance was asked by the government to look into other sites for federal quarantine facilities only two months ago. Where we're at is that they've done some early feasibility work. But we all know that with projects like this you need detailed feasibility and design work. And whilst the government is reluctant to give us a date, I think what we could take from evidence before the committee last week is that it is months and months away from having any solution on or increased capacity in federal or national quarantine facilities. We also learnt that what the Prime Minister has been telling us, that we've moved from 850 to 2,000 spots at Howard Springs, is also untrue. We haven't got close to that. Last week the numbers were in the order of 1,200 people at Howard Springs. So even the extra capacity that the Prime Minister promised hasn't been reached at the facility that is operational.</para>
<para>The government has simply been too slow to act, and this bill is a consequence of that. The bill before us contains five measures. Schedule 1 of the bill makes amendments to allow the government to make payments to entities impacted by lockdowns during the period of 1 July 2021 to 31 December 2022. Schedule 2 of the bill allows the disclosure of tax information to be provided to Australian government agencies to facilitate COVID-19 business support programs. Schedule 3 of the bill will make payments received by businesses under certain COVID-19 business support programs tax free. Schedule 4 of the bill introduces a temporary mechanism that existed last year that allows ministers to change arrangements for meeting information and documentary requirements under Commonwealth legislation, including requirements to give information and produce, witness and sign documents. This measure will be in place until 31 December. Schedule 5 of the bill would make the COVID-19 payment tax free, covering up what appears to be a slip from the Prime Minister when he said these payments were tax free when guidance online from Treasury, ATO and Services Australia had originally said they were.</para>
<para>Labor does support this bill. Again, we would say that the Commonwealth came late to the table in terms of providing some economic support and engagement. I think they were really forced by the state governments to step up to the table. I think the differential treatment that was provided to Victoria and then to New South Wales, the 'when should the payments kick in' and the 'who should be responsible for what' just shows how dysfunctional this Prime Minister's leadership of national cabinet is. It seems he can't reach agreement with a group of first ministers at all. Unless pressured, he stubbornly refuses to engage; it's only when everyone else can see that the Commonwealth should be stepping up and should be providing support. The lockdown we're having now is directly as a result of the failures of this Prime Minister to manage the vaccine procurement and rollout strategy in the interests of the country and the failure to accept responsibility for quarantine. Quite unbelievably, he is uninterested and without a sense of urgency about managing the risk of people returning to this country. We have 38,000 Australians still overseas, more than 32,000 of whom want to return immediately. There are hundreds of unaccompanied minors overseas unable to return because this government have failed to accept that they have responsibility for quarantine, that they have responsibility for Australian citizens who need to return to this country. The government's failures—the leaks from hotel quarantine, the fact that our communities' vaccination levels are so low—have led to the situation we're in today where we are so vulnerable to the impact of the pandemic that these strict lockdowns had to be put in place.</para>
<para>When it comes to the support that the government's now providing, I think they did it reluctantly. They only did it when they realised how serious the lockdowns were going to be. But overall we support the economic response as it's outlined in this bill. We think the government should keep an open mind about whether they need to do more and how they respond to the situation as it evolves, and we've always said that. Target the assistance to the economic circumstances of the time. That is still our message. It's been our message from the beginning of the pandemic right throughout, and this remains the case. The government should work with other state governments collegiately. They shouldn't treat them differently. They shouldn't be stubborn. They shouldn't refuse support at the first hurdle and then accept the need to step up only when things get really dire.</para>
<para>We need to provide businesses and individuals with certainty that, as we move through the vaccination stage of this pandemic, people will be looked after, they will be supported and we all stand together. Certainty can be provided about economic response. We shouldn't be having businesses wondering when they're going to get help and who they're going to get help from. The Commonwealth should take a leadership role on this. We support this bill, but let's make no mistake: the fact that we're here debating this bill is because of the significant failures of this government in relation to vaccine and quarantine.</para>
<para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) only 15% of Australians are fully vaccinated;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) businesses and workers are struggling from lockdowns made necessary by the Government's botched vaccine rollout and the lack of purpose-built quarantine facilities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) these lockdowns are costing the Australian economy hundreds of millions of dollars every day".</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Greens will be supporting this legislation, as I expect all members of the Senate will. It's fair to say that this parliament has been nothing but cooperative in facilitating the payment of income support to businesses and to people during this pandemic. As a result of that cooperation and the willingness of this parliament to see a wages guarantee established to help prevent total and utter economic calamity and the impacts that would have on so many people, we have seen the government set up JobKeeper in a way that allowed it to be rorted by so many big corporations.</para>
<para>Now, we don't have the definitive figures yet, but data provided by the Parliamentary Budget Office shows that, for more than 365,000 recipients of JobKeeper, accounting for about 40 per cent of workers covered under the scheme, their turnover didn't end up falling below threshold levels in the first three months of the scheme. This means that at least $12.5 billion in JobKeeper payments went to businesses and other entities that didn't actually need it. The final number will likely be higher because these figures are only in relation to the first phase of JobKeeper. JobKeeper became, for some corporations, profit-maker and bonus-payer. The government saw it happening and the government did nothing to stop it. The government has done nothing to rectify it since. The government seems entirely comfortable with the biggest stimulus program in our country's history being rorted to the hilt by big corporations. You'd be forgiven for thinking the government designed it that way, because, if nothing else, we know full well that this government looks after its mates, the billionaires and the big corporations. And those people, the billionaires and those companies, the big corporations, are the people and companies that won out of JobKeeper more than anyone did.</para>
<para>The bill before us today is very similar to the bill that established the first JobKeeper. This bill, like its predecessor, is effectively a shell that gives the Treasurer extremely wide scope to make rules for payments to entities affected by the pandemic. The Greens accepted the argument for the JobKeeper bill to be structured in such a way given the speed with which parliament needed to respond to what was then an unheralded set of circumstances. But here we now stand, 17 months into the pandemic, and we have, or should have, a much better understanding of what we're facing and the government should be much better prepared. But instead, they are serving up to us another blank canvas for the Treasurer.</para>
<para>The government should not, any longer, be making it up as it goes along. The government, by now, should have put in place an off-the-shelf payment program for the rolling series of lockdowns that they themselves predicted that we would be facing. Not so long ago the Treasurer was crowing about the March quarter economic data, no doubt with an early election in his mind. But instead of counting his chickens before they hatched he should have been putting his mind to what the country actually needed, which was certainty and clarity as to what kind of support would be provided in what circumstances when the inevitable happens.</para>
<para>Given that this parliament is once again presented with a bill with such wide scope for the development of COVID support payments, the Greens have circulated an amendment that seeks to prevent a re-run of the JobKeeper rorts. The Greens second reading amendment on sheet 1359 is a straightforward proposition, and I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate calls on the Treasurer to ensure that rules regarding payments providing financial support to entities prevent payments being made to, or include a mechanism to recover payments from, large companies that are profitable or pay executive bonuses in the same financial year that they receive a payment".</para></quote>
<para>This amendment says to the Treasurer, 'Don't give any more money to the big corporations that are profitable or that pay executives bonuses or, if you do give them the money, make them pay it back.' This is what the government should have originally done with JobKeeper and this is what the parliament should ensure that they do with the next round of payments. I encourage the Senate to support this amendment and send a clear message back to the House that this latest round of support payments is not to boost company profits and is not for the payment of large executive bonuses.</para>
<para>A final note on the JobKeeper rorts: this parliament has a chance to rectify the situation, to ensure that the billions of dollars in public money that ended up boosting the profits of big corporations and lining the pockets of their executives is paid back. I've tabled a bill on behalf of the Australian Greens, the Coronavirus Economic Response Package Amendment (Ending JobKeeper Profiteering) Bill in the Senate, and that bill is currently under inquiry. That bill proposes withholding tax input credits equal to the value of JobKeeper payments made to large companies that ended up being profitable or paid executive bonuses. It would also establish a public register of large companies that received JobKeeper, very similar to what Senator Patrick is proposing in his amendment to this bill. I hope to bring that bill before the Senate before the end of this year.</para>
<para>Over the next three or four months we should get a much clearer picture of just how much JobKeeper was used to boost company profits and pay executive bonuses. I predict that Australians will continue to be shocked and dismayed by just how extensive the rorting was, and I expect that the public anger at what happened will continue to grow.</para>
<para>Before I conclude, I also want to note that, according to the announcements made already by this government regarding the payments facilitated by this bill, those in receipt of standing income support payments—JobSeeker, youth allowance, disability support pension and carer payments—are once again being ignored by this government. The lockdown support payments already announced do nothing to ensure that those who were already relying on an income support payment, who were already struggling before this latest wave of lockdowns, have enough money to live in dignity and to live above the poverty line. If history is any guide, it's those who were struggling the most before the pandemic hit and before the latest lockdowns that will find it hardest to make a good life for themselves in the aftermath of the economic shock. That those opposite continue to treat their fellow Australians with such disrespect and disdain just confirms that they're not here to look after all Australians; they're here to look after their mates, who run the big corporations and who are the billionaires who have profiteered so spectacularly and built their wealth to such obscene levels during this pandemic.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>10000</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator McKim, I advise you that Senator Gallagher has already moved a second reading amendment, so at this point yours is foreshadowed. Senator Brockman.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BROCKMAN</name>
    <name.id>30484</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I too rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021. I want to begin with a quick look at the general Australian economy. When this government faced the onset of the pandemic last year, we knew very quickly that we had two challenges. We had the challenge of ensuring the health and wellbeing of all Australians, and we also had the equally important challenge of ensuring that our economy was protected as much as possible during what was a huge economic shock and that it could recover strongly from that shock. It has been the greatest economic shock since the Great Depression; we must always remember that. We had to put the economy in a position where it could recover from that shock, and the Australian economy has done so in a way that is quite remarkable and certainly not matched by any other advanced economy, to date.</para>
<para>I've said in this place a number of times that your GDP numbers, your headline numbers, aren't important in and of themselves. They're important because of what they mean for real people's lives. They're important because of what they mean for real families, real people, going about their day-to-day lives in the Australian economy. To that end, we've seen that the jobs lost during the pandemic have been recovered and the unemployment rate has fallen to 4.9 per cent, as of June, which is below pre-pandemic levels. Of course we will see some movement up and down in the unemployment rate; we always do. But the numbers show that the response of this government to the shock of the pandemic has been extraordinarily effective in doing what we set out to do—making sure Australian businesses and Australian workers could continue, could plan for the future, could protect jobs and could have enough business certainty, enough business confidence, to invest in the future rather than worrying about how they were going to make their wages bill for the next month.</para>
<para>In terms of jobs, we've seen a million jobs created since May 2020. Employment has surpassed its pre-pandemic levels, with 160,000 more Australians in work. Fifty-six per cent of those jobs have gone to women, while a third have gone to young people aged between 15 and 24. The unemployment rate has decreased in eight consecutive months, as I said, falling to 4.9 per cent in June, despite the end of the JobKeeper program in March. This is the lowest unemployment rate in seven years. Youth unemployment fell to its lowest rate in 12 years. The ABS, in fact, stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The end of the JobKeeper wage subsidy did not have a discernible impact on employment between March and April.</para></quote>
<para>The ratio of unemployed people to vacancies is now at its lowest level in over a decade, and 180,000 people have come off unemployment benefits since the end of JobKeeper. Obviously, these are all very good numbers, in any circumstances. But to have these results—to have these people in work, to have 180,000 people come off unemployment benefits and to have 160,000 more Australians in work than pre pandemic—is quite an extraordinary outcome for the Australian economy. I congratulate all those people out there who have managed to take up a new job in this period and all those businesses who have offered those jobs. Again, that shows that businesses have confidence in the future.</para>
<para>I just want to turn to what business has been doing during this period, because it is important to note. Since the October budget, investments in new machinery and equipment have increased at the fastest rate since March 2003, by 8.5 per cent in the December quarter and 10.3 per cent in the March quarter, to be a total of 7.2 per cent higher over the year. Again, this is helping to drive that business confidence, which means that they will take a risk, they will employ new people and they will grow their business. We've got to remember that 18 months ago—and I have heard this story repeated over and over again throughout the small and medium-sized businesses of Australia—people were literally sitting in their offices thinking about how they were going to walk out onto the shop floor and tell their 30 staff, their 15 staff, their 10 staff or their two staff that they no longer had a job. Then details of the JobKeeper program came through, and I can tell you that all those people breathed more than just a sigh of relief. It changed lives. It changed the economy. It changed people's approaches to the circumstances they were in, and it boosted confidence to an extraordinary degree, where businesses were willing to invest.</para>
<para>The Australian Bureau of Statistics measures that the capex expectations for 2021 were upgraded again, from an expected fall of 4.7 per cent in 2019-20 to an increase of 9.7 per cent in 2021-22. According to the NAB business survey, both business confidence and conditions increased to record levels just prior to the most recent outbreak. Business conditions rose to a fresh record high in May, while business confidence also remains around record levels.</para>
<para>Obviously, the lockdowns have an impact on that. We don't deny that, as a government, and we need to have an economic response to that, as a government. That is what we'll do. We understand very much that Australians facing lockdowns are asking questions about their incomes and about the weeks ahead, as well as the pathway back to a normal life. That is why, for Australians facing lockdowns, we are directly delivering financial support, through Services Australia, to individuals and businesses impacted by the lockdowns. We are sharing the costs with state governments, delivering much-needed support to small and medium-sized businesses. People who have lost more than 20 hours of work in the previous week can claim $750. People who have lost between eight hours and 20 hours, or a full day of work, can claim $450. This is the same level of support we provided with JobKeeper last year. This is obviously in addition to all the other benefits they can get at this time.</para>
<para>It is important that, as a government, we respond to the situation we find ourselves in and provide support to those Australians who need it. However, we must also very clearly recognise the difference between the situation last year and the situation this year. JobKeeper was a national program based on business decline in turnover. It was rolled out across the nation, not on a case-by-case basis based on lockdowns in particular states. The support being paid to individuals in lockdown right now can be delivered quickly to those who need it, even as quickly as 40 minutes after application. The COVID disaster payment is effectively JobKeeper, delivering the same level of support to individuals as JobKeeper. As the Treasurer highlighted, the disaster payment is supporting those who are unable to work, who wouldn't be eligible for JobKeeper if it were in operation. So there's a very good case for the changes that we have made to the systems of support in the economy, and obviously they are going to receive support in this place.</para>
<para>I think it's important in my last couple of minutes to note again the importance of giving businesses the confidence to invest in their people, in their economies, in the local economies that they support and to allow them and their employees to continue, even in the continuingly strange times in which we live. Obviously we all hope the lockdowns can end as soon as possible and we all hope that we have a return to a much more normal economy in the very near future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator MARIELLE SMITH</name>
    <name.id>281603</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Before I begin my remarks on the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021, I want to acknowledge the millions of Australians who are currently in lockdown around our country and the millions more who have only just been released from a lockdown in their state. We know that the delta variant makes lockdowns a necessary tool in our arsenal against COVID-19, but the necessity of these lockdowns doesn't make them any easier for those living in them. Indeed, there are huge costs for Australians living in lockdown: the economic cost of lost hours of work, of lost business; the social cost of the disconnection from friends, family and loved ones; the health cost; and, especially, the cost to the wellbeing and mental wellness of too many Australians.</para>
<para>Australian families in lockdown are doing it incredibly tough around our country, just as they done in South Australia and Victoria recently. I want Australians to know that, when we are here talking today about the economic cost of lockdowns, we haven't forgotten the other ways in which this pandemic is hurting you, the other costs it is bearing down on you—socially, in terms of your health and in terms of your wellbeing. And I want to say to South Australians, in my state, that I am as desperate as you are to see Australia return to business as usual as quickly and as safely as possible.</para>
<para>This bill goes to the immediate economic impacts of the lockdown and it provides the administrative support arrangements necessary to ensure that the Commonwealth can deliver support to those Australians who need it the most. This support is desperately needed. It was desperately needed in South Australia, and I know it's desperately needed by individuals around our country who are also experiencing lockdown. That's why Labor will be supporting the bill. We know it's our responsibility to support Australians when they need our help the most.</para>
<para>We are 18 months into this pandemic and, in too many ways, it feels like we're right back in 2020. With bated breath, Australians across the country are tuning in to their premiers' press conferences each morning wondering what the numbers will mean in their state. The Prime Minister, in his morning press conferences, says a lot but is helping little. Our parliament is operating remotely, as we are doing today. Businesses are struggling to understand and implement the rules. Shops are open, shops are closed. Masks are on, masks are off. In the last month alone, we have seen half the country put into snap lockdowns in response to outbreaks of the delta variant. In New South Wales, we've had weeks of it and we've got weeks to go, without a clear end in sight. We've got uncertainty about what the future holds in Queensland, and, of course, all of us live with uncertainty every day about when the next outbreak might occur, what that might mean and whether we're back in lockdown, whether we're back in those conditions: locking down, shutting up shop, stopping work.</para>
<para>And let's be clear, until the government get the vaccine rollout right and until the government get a handle on quarantine, which is their responsibility, until they get that right, lockdowns for the Delta variant will be a way of life. People's lives will be disrupted; hours will be lost at work; businesses will be closed, suffering through no fault of their own. Stock will be thrown out. Staff will be stood down. There are still rents to pay, but with reduced income. There will be reduced support and reduced viability. There will be confusion and fear. Kids will be forced to do home learning. We're yet to know the impact of being away from school for so many of these children—particularly vulnerable kids, kids with poorer internet connections, kids who suffer more than others when things like this happen. And, of course, there are parents struggling to work full time at home and home school their kids, feeling great fear and great uncertainty about what the future holds.</para>
<para>Initial estimates suggested that the most recent South Australian lockdown could come with a $200 million hit to our local economy. That is horrendous. The economic impact of this in my state is horrendous. It's horrendous at the broader scale, in terms of the impact on our state, and it's horrendous at the micro scale—the small businesses throwing milk down the drain because they're not serving coffees this weekend; standing staff down; not knowing how to stock their fridge for the weekend trade ahead; not knowing whether staff are going to be needed or necessary, whether they can survive doing things like takeaway or whether they can even open their doors. How do they keep their staff safe if they do open their doors? Wages are lost from the pockets of workers, of employees whose employers have been forced to stand them down.</para>
<para>And for those employees, those workers in casual work and in insecure work, these challenges are even greater. For those workers who live pay cheque to pay cheque, who find it hard to wait even a week for a disaster payment to kick in, losing just a few hours of work can mean the difference between paying their rent and paying their grocery bill, paying their electricity bill and feeding their family. For these workers this is especially tough. These workers have no choice to work at home. These workers, when their employer shuts their business and these workers are stood down with no means of supporting themselves and their families—over and over again we have seen Australians put in this position during lockdown, this position of vulnerability, this position of fear. It's unacceptable. Yes, it is a necessary tool in our lockdown arsenal against the Delta variant, but we shouldn't be here. Our ticket out of this is better quarantine; our ticket out of this is a better, effective vaccine rollout. And on these two fronts—these two fronts that are the Commonwealth's responsibilities—we have seen failure after failure from the Commonwealth government.</para>
<para>So while we welcome this bill—we welcome the measures within it, we welcome the ability for the Commonwealth to provide this level of financial support—we need to actually get the policy levers right, which would ensure we don't have these lockdowns, we're not in this position over and over again. If we do that, we give that certainty and that security to Australians. We protect them. We keep them safe. That is the key role of the Commonwealth government here. That is what they should be delivering, and that is what they have failed to do over and over again.</para>
<para>This bill enables government to make those policy decisions to provide for that financial support, and we welcome that. I note the payments are tax free, although the government seem to be in a bit of kerfuffle and confused about whether that was the case and whether it would be so, but we welcome that. We welcome that it means more support into the hands of Australians and into the hands of Australian families who need it. But, the fact remains that until the Commonwealth gets those two policy levers right, those two policy levers we know they are responsible for—vaccinations and proper quarantine facilities to replace hotel quarantine—and which we know would keep Australians safer from these variants entering Australia, then we are going to continue to live with bandaid solutions—solutions which fix the impact of these failures rather than address the heart of the failures, which is what the Commonwealth needs to be doing.</para>
<para>I want to see us through this as quickly as possible. I don't want to be here talking about economic and financial support, because the fact that we have to means that those costs have already been borne by Australians. That difficulty, challenge and heartache has already been borne by South Australians. I don't want to be here discussing this. So we support it, but the best we in this place and in this chamber can do is get to the heart of the reason why we're here and fix the policy failures of the Commonwealth.</para>
<para>This vaccine rollout is failing—it's failing to get the take-up it needs, we're failing with supply and we're failing with communication—which has left Australians feeling anxious and uncertain. We need Australians to get vaccinated. Vaccination is the key to get out of this mess. Vaccination is the key to get back to a life that is more normal, to being able to live alongside COVID. The Commonwealth have failed. They have failed in the rollout. They have failed in supply. They have failed in the messaging. Is it any wonder that Australians feel the way they do about this rollout?</para>
<para>Today I want to mention young Australians as well because they have suffered tremendously at the heart of these lockdowns and throughout this pandemic in so many different ways. They have borne the brunt of the economic impacts of COVID. Their jobs are among the most insecure and are often the first to be axed. Their super accounts were the lowest before they were forced to raid them during the pandemic last year, because that's what government policy forced them to do. It's their future that's affected in terms of the fiscal implications of this and the burden they have to bear going forward.</para>
<para>For every missed target, disappearing horizon and unmet deadline younger Australians face the prospect of their workplaces being closed, of missing out and of suffering in terms of their economic wellbeing, their social wellbeing and their mental health. Overwhelmingly, young Australians have suffered very hard at the hands of this pandemic. They've been forgotten and looked over by too many in government. It's not acceptable for those young Australians. They have borne the brunt of this pandemic. They have borne the brunt of the economic impact, and they will continue to bear the brunt of it going forward.</para>
<para>The lockdown in South Australia recently was incredibly hard. I want to acknowledge every South Australian who found it challenging and tough. Mums and dads were home schooling their kids. They were trying to work at home and do the best they could. It was a tough situation. Of course there are also families and workers in our community who didn't have the choice to work from home. They were stood down because of the lockdown. They didn't have a choice to go to work and do their job there. Their job could only happen when the business they work for is open.</para>
<para>Of course, our essential workers did go to work every day. They worked in the supermarkets and drove our buses. They put their health on the line to make sure our community and economy could continue to run and function. We owe these workers an enormous debt of gratitude. They had to go to work each day knowing the risks and the potential impacts. They have done a tremendous job. Some employees working in these essential sectors have been some of the most undervalued in our society. I hope that, if anything changes from this pandemic, it's that we value them properly now. Our supermarket workers, our childcare workers, our public transport workers and our cleaners have carried so much of the burden of this pandemic and yet in many ways they have continued to be underpaid and undervalued.</para>
<para>In closing, Labor of course support this legislation. We support measures being taken to limit and ease the economic burden on Australian citizens because of these lockdowns. Of course we support that, but let us not just support Australians with these sorts of systems; let's support them with policy that goes to the heart of the failures that mean lockdowns are essential in the first place—failed vaccination rollout and failed quarantine. If the Commonwealth gets those two things right, admits and acknowledges its failure and just does better then perhaps we won't need to sit here discussing these measures. Perhaps we could get back to business as usual in Australia. Perhaps we could start to see an end to the incredibly burdensome economic, social and human costs this pandemic is having on South Australians and Australians more broadly. That's what I want to see. That's what I'm fighting for in here. So, whilst we welcome and acknowledge these measures, let's actually see from the government, please, an earnest attempt to fix the failures they are responsible for, which would mean we wouldn't require these measures in the first place.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021 and I indicate upfront that I will be supporting this bill. The measures in this bill are in fact needed; I think everyone accepts that. The bill was provided to me in confidence on Monday, and I thank the government for getting it to my office early. It is often difficult, particularly for the crossbench, to deal with all the legislation approaching for the week. It was tabled in the House yesterday and it's being dealt with in the Senate today. It has not followed the normal process because it's urgently needed to assist those in lockdown in Sydney. It's interesting that the explanatory memorandum, when I was looking through it, had a line that shocked me when I saw it. Page 3 of the explanatory memorandum says:</para>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Compliance cost impact</inline>: An exemption from Regulation Impact Statement requirements was granted by the Prime Minister as there were urgent and unforeseen circumstances.</para></quote>
<para>I find that actually quite unbelievable. This is the sort of text you might think would win some literary award because it certainly is fiction. I accept the need is urgent as there are people in Sydney who need help. I don't accept that the bill needs to be urgent because this was foreseen. There must have been advice to the effect that we would need further assistance as we had to deal with various strains of the pandemic. If there was advice that said something different, we need to really look long and hard at this advice. But the problem is we can't see any of it.</para>
<para>We can't see any advice because any advice that's related to the health of Australians during this pandemic is sprinkled with national cabinet secrecy dust, completely unnecessarily. I'm pleased to inform the chamber that tomorrow, at 2:45 pm New South Wales time, Justice White will hand down his decision in my matters challenging whether the national cabinet is a cabinet, so I'm waiting to see what happens there. I think that will be interesting because hopefully that will open up the information that flows through to parliamentarians, to experts, to professionals in the medical field and to the public, so that they can critique the advice and analyse the advice for themselves. I'm hopeful that I'll get an outcome that will support that future course. This is the problem. Transparency is a good thing. When transparency exists, people are required to perform at their absolute best. And it's in the absence of transparency that we see all sorts of things go wrong, as has happened in this pandemic, as has happened in relation to quarantine, as has happened in relation to the vaccine rollout.</para>
<para>This morning I revealed the fact that the COVID vaccine certificate, which I received just last week as I got my second AstraZeneca jab, is easily forged. As we were developing a vaccine that almost certainly—in fact, inevitably—will be connected to health measures, that's something that should have been thought about. I'm pleased to say I have talked to Minister Reynolds and opened a dialogue. I do appreciate you, Minister Reynolds, allowing me to approach you on that. But again, if we'd seen what was happening behind the scenes, some of these comments could have been made a little bit earlier, and perhaps we could have had better outcomes, or outcomes that worked a bit sooner, and, indeed, we wouldn't have to waste money by repeating things.</para>
<para>That leads me to the amendment that I am going to move during the committee stage. This is an amendment that focuses on transparency. It was mentioned by Senator McKim in his speech in the second reading debate. I'll give you a bit of history around this amendment. My amendment seeks to provide transparency in relation to large companies that get public funding throughout this pandemic, and that goes back through JobKeeper.</para>
<para>I'll just explain to you what happened in New Zealand in relation to their wage subsidy program. New Zealand spent approximately $12 billion on COVID-19 direct wage subsidies, and they received $637 million back from companies who said, 'Look, we thought we might have needed it, but actually we didn't.' Five and a half per cent of what was paid out was actually returned. Here in Australia we've spent approximately $89 billion, close to $90 billion, in COVID-19 direct wage subsidies, and we've only received $225 million back. That's 0.25 per cent in repayments.</para>
<para>The difference between Australia and New Zealand is not in any strict legislative regime that attempts to minimise corruption or fraud; New Zealand also approached it with the view 'Let's help first.' But what they have done is publish on a website—it's very easy to find, and I encourage senators to go and do this—the names of employers who receive a subsidy payment and how much they get paid. If they fully repay the money, they're taken off the list. If they partially repay some money, that is reduced from the amount that is shown of the total subsidy they received. It's not name and shame. It's about saying that, if a company is in receipt of public funding, there's a reasonable expectation from the public's side that that's information that ought to be known. It's not private company information per se, because it's about the amount of money—taxpayers' money—given to the company. We understand that many of these companies needed that money. Many companies may well need money that is being delivered under this particular program, under this particular bill. In New Zealand they have quite successfully managed to get greater returns from people who didn't require the money, just by being transparent and letting people see where taxpayers' money went.</para>
<para>That is, in effect, what my amendment seeks to do. My amendment seeks, as a starting point, simply to have the names of larger companies who received JobKeeper published on an ATO website that has the name of the entity, the number of individuals for whom the entity received a JobKeeper payment, each period for which the entity received a JobKeeper payment, the total amount of JobKeeper received by the entity and whether or not they've voluntarily paid back any money. It's pretty simple. It's not intrusive. It's a transparency measure that's designed, in the case of JobKeeper, to have companies look and say: 'You know what, it's now out there publicly that we received this money. Can we properly justify it?' They may answer, 'No, so maybe we should pay it back,' or, 'Yes, we can justify that and we thank you very much, taxpayer.'</para>
<para>That's the aim of my amendment. It doesn't seek to do it, however, just in relation to JobKeeper; it also seeks to do it, moving forward, for any payments made to larger companies, to enable the public to see what is being spent with whom. This new bill will encourage a system of honesty and integrity that makes sure that taxpayers' money is actually spent properly and in accordance with the intended aim of the payments. I'll speak briefly of this again during the committee stage. I encourage senators to support my amendment.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CANAVAN</name>
    <name.id>245212</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's an honour to rise to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021, and in doing so to continue the government's efforts to provide support to people through these very difficult and costly times for our nation. We have provided well over $300 billion of assistance across the Australian economy since early last year. The government have always been willing to respond as necessary to people's needs during that time, but we must also recognise the enormous cost that has come to our nation's balance sheet and our nation's wealth. This will limit the options that future generations of Australians have, because they will be burdened with a much bigger debt than they expected just 18 months ago. In fact, our debt now, approaching $1 trillion, is the highest it has been as a share of our economy since the end of World War II. As a nation we face a lot of threats and challenges beyond the coronavirus, and we must make sure we do all we can to maintain our fiscal strength in helping future generations of Australians to respond to these challenges.</para>
<para>I want to start by responding to some of the points made in this debate, particularly by those opposite. Some have suggested that all we need to do is get the vaccination rate up and then it will be back to business as usual. The sun will come up, lockdowns will end and there'll be no more coronavirus—it'll all be gone. That's not what the modelling showed yesterday. It is past time as a nation that we in this place, of all people, be upfront with the Australian people and get rid of the fantasy and fairytales that we are continually trying to put the Australian people to sleep with. We should front up to them with the facts and the reality of this terrible pandemic and what might happen in the next few years in this country regardless of what we do or how many people get vaccinated in the months ahead. That was revealed yesterday in the modelling.</para>
<para>Perhaps the most revealing figure in the Doherty Institute modelling was that, even in an environment where 80 per cent of Australians get vaccinated—and that's the target to get to phase 4 of the plan—within 180 days of hitting that 80 per cent target and reverting to some baseline restrictions, while still testing and tracing—and I'll come back to that—40,000 vaccinated Australians will become symptomatically infectious with the coronavirus. So far, in the first 18 months of this pandemic, 34,800 Australians—or it might be 34,300—have been infected with coronavirus. So even when 80 per cent of Australians are vaccinated, within six months more vaccinated Australians will pick up a symptomatic version of the coronavirus. We need to face up to that. It's more than that—that's just people who are vaccinated. You can have these things called breakthrough infections.</para>
<para>I am pro-vaccination. I am planning to get mine. I encourage everyone to do the same. But again, we have to be up-front with the Australian people, that the evidence is people still can and do, quite commonly overseas, pick up a coronavirus infection despite being vaccinated. It does, of course, greatly reduce their risk of death or hospitalisation. But on top of the 40,000 people who would unfortunately get the coronavirus, even with the vaccination, another 238,991—let's call it 240,000-odd—Australians who are unvaccinated would also become infectious with the coronavirus within six months. So let's be up-front with the Australian people: even at an 80 per cent vaccination rate, within six months, we would be looking at 280,000 coronavirus infections, well above—seven times—what we have experienced in the first 18 months of this pandemic. That is the reality and the truth of the situation we're facing. And those 280,000 coronavirus infections would be in a world where we still had a two-square-metre rule; they would be in a world, according to this modelling, where we would still have only 70 per cent capacity at sporting stadiums; we wouldn't go back to full crowds in this world where we had 280,000 coronavirus infections. It would be a world where we still had testing, tracing, isolation and quarantine. So if you went to a place or you were unfortunate to be in a place where one of those 280,000 infections occurred, you would then have to quarantine as well. It will not return to normal, even with those figures, even with that vaccination rate, and it is high time we recognised that fact.</para>
<para>It would also be the case, if people picked up infections, that they would go to hospital. People will, unfortunately, die, and we need to be up-front with people about that. The government cannot save every life. The government cannot get rid of the two certainties in life, one of which is death. Possibly we could get rid of taxes—we could possibly do that—but I don't think we will; that certainty will still be there for people too. Under this modelling, with 80 per cent vaccination rate across Australia, within 180 days, around 2,000 Australians would be admitted to ICU wards and over 1,000 people would die, including 439 people who were vaccinated. They would unfortunately die, according to this modelling.</para>
<para>Again, the vaccinations aren't perfect. I'm pro-vaccine. But we cannot keep telling people the fantasy that we can solve all of these problems. If we don't be up-front with the Australian people, we will not be able to get out of this and we will continue these very cruel lockdowns, which are causing enormous costs on our economy and particularly on people. I am against the lockdowns. The evidence we have seen this week has shown why that should be the case. A part of the reason is that these lockdowns just kick the can down the road. As those figures show, we will eventually, even with vaccination, still end up in an environment with infections, with deaths, with fatalities. We are not comparing here a cost today for infection tomorrow; that is an unattainable promise that should not be made to the Australian people. We are facing the situation of any road being a difficult one for us to venture along. The key thing, though, is which road, which path, can lead to the lowest cost for all Australians, not just focus on one thing—the coronavirus.</para>
<para>There are daily press conferences where we focus on how many cases there are, whether or not someone has tragically died from coronavirus overnight. Unfortunately, it is a common tendency for people to manage what is measured. We are measuring the coronavirus very minutely at the moment, so we are obsessed with managing it. There are no press conferences, though, about the number of small businesses that went to the wall last night in Australia. There are no press conferences which tell us all how many marriages have broken up last night because of the stress of people being in lockdown. There are no press conferences telling us how many people have lost their jobs and who are at their wits' end overnight because of these lockdowns. And because we are not measuring those costs, they are being ignored and are not being factored into proper decision-making.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, the decisions to lock down are being made by people here and in parliaments at the state level. None of us, and none of the advisers and public servants who are informing us on these decisions, bear a cost of the lockdown in any true sense. We still get paid. We still have a job. We can still pay our mortgages and keep our houses. We are in what's called the laptop class. I can work off a laptop. In fact, I'll share a little secret: I kind of like lockdowns. I'm sorry, I don't like the fact that we have to do them. But I can stay at home with my family. I don't have to travel. I don't have to go to boring meetings or functions. It's fantastic. But there are a whole lot of people out there in this country for whom it's not good. For them, lockdowns are no fun. They lose their jobs. They lose their business. Where in this parliament and this place is the voice for them? Who is giving them dignity by standing up for them against the cost of these lockdowns that are being imposed by people who don't have to bear the cost themselves, don't have to take a pay cut, don't have to stay awake at night thinking about how they're going to pay their mortgage and don't have to stay awake at night thinking about how they're going to make up the payroll for their employees? Where are the people advocating for them? There are an enormous number—millions—of Australians now facing that situation, and we ignore them by continuing these lockdowns, which are far too costly.</para>
<para>We deserve a proper assessment of the costs of this approach. I welcome the figures that were released by the government yesterday, but they didn't amount to a costing of lockdowns. They are a costing of the four-phase plan—a costing of different vaccination levels and what they mean—and the conclusions are clear: high vaccination rates are good, and they are what we should be aiming for. They will lower the cost of any strategy. Any particular response to the coronavirus will be better and less costly the more people we can get vaccinated, and that should absolutely be our goal. But the modelling released yesterday assumed that we would impose lockdowns at certain levels of coronavirus spread, so it did not actually assess whether or not a lockdown strategy was less costly, even just in economic terms, let alone in terms of mental health and the other issues I've spoken about. It did not assess whether that is less costly than an approach which is more focused on testing, tracing, isolation, quarantine and reasonable restrictions and measures that fall short of putting everybody out of work—or at least putting everybody not in the laptop class out of work.</para>
<para>We deserve that. We deserve to do that for the millions of Australians who do not have the same flexibility that we in this place have. To be upfront with them about how much this is costing them and whether, in fact, it is the right decision for all, we should be providing them with that information. There are limited figures out there about what these lockdowns are costing, but you can make a pretty clear estimation of the massive costs of some. There was some modelling by a different organisation, the Burnet Institute, another respected group of virologists. They said this week that the New South Wales lockdowns had avoided 4,000 coronavirus cases. I have no reason to dispute their figures, so 4,000 coronavirus cases have been avoided. At that stage the New South Wales lockdown had gone on for 35 days. AMP estimate that the lockdowns are costing $150 million a day. That probably seems like an underestimate, especially given the extra support we're providing now, but, regardless, let's take it as $150 million a day. So, at the 35-day mark, the lockdowns had cost $5.3 billion to avoid 4,000 coronavirus cases.</para>
<para>Simple mathematics shows that that means we are spending $1.3 million to avoid each and every coronavirus case. That is $1.3 million for each case—not a fatality, not an admission to an ICU ward, but for each case. That's just the economic cost. That doesn't include the impact on people's marriages, their small businesses and their long-term health. This is way out of whack, and perhaps the reason we haven't got proper costings for this or what it is costing our economy, our society and our communities right now. The figures would be eye-watering and indefensible, because it is indefensible to spend that amount of money to avoid one coronavirus case. We do not apply that in any other public policy issue. Twenty thousand Australians a year die from smoking, 5,000 die from alcohol and around 1,000 die on our roads. We do not ban these things; we live with them. We realise we can't avoid every risk. We let people get on with their lives and make their own decisions about that balance.</para>
<para>What would be best, sooner rather than later, is if we restore the principle of personal responsibility and people making their own judgements about risk. Those of us that are lucky enough to work from home can still choose to do that. If we got rid of lockdowns, you could still do that. I could work from home on my laptop—I didn't have to be here this week—and I could avoid or limit my trips outside. You could do that. But imposing that lifestyle on people who don't have the same flexibility as you is immoral. It is extremely painful for those Australians who are suffering right now under an imposed, government enforced, police backed and now Army backed lockdown of their lives. We have to restore some balance to this debate and be upfront with the Australian people about what the future holds, and the future holds whatever we choose. Whatever vaccination rates we go for, coronavirus will spread. We must learn to live with this virus.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATT</name>
    <name.id>245759</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Like other Labor speakers, I will be supporting the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021 because Labor certainly supports the government's plans, albeit belated plans, to get money into the hands of people who are suffering right now from Prime Minister Scott Morrison's lockdown. We know that there are millions of people across Australia hurting very badly as a result of the Prime Minister's failures, which have led to these lockdowns, and I will have a little bit more to say about that over the course of my contribution.</para>
<para>The mere fact that we need this bill is evidence of the Prime Minister's failures. As we have often said, and will continue to say, this year the Prime Minister had two jobs: to fix the vaccine rollout and to build purpose-built quarantine stations around our country so that we could stop relying on hotel quarantine. Hotel quarantine is a leaky system which, so far, has seen 27 leaks of COVID-19 from it, and no doubt with more to come over the months if not years that we will have to wait for this government and this Prime Minister to finally build the quarantine facilities that were recommended by their own expert last year.</para>
<para>It is terribly sad for millions of Australians that the Prime Minister has so grossly failed to perform those two jobs that he had. And the results can be seen all around us. There are currently 10 million Australians in lockdown across greater Sydney and South-East Queensland. I note it has been confirmed today there is a COVID-positive case in Cairns, so we will have to keep an eye on what happens there, and in recent days there has been a COVID-positive case in Central Queensland as well. That has not led to an outbreak as yet, and we can only hope that that remains the case. These are the consequences of the Prime Minister's failure to do his job.</para>
<para>We remember this Prime Minister saying, over and over again, that the vaccination rollout was not a race. 'It's not a race; it's not a competition.' And you can certainly see that was the attitude this Prime Minister had when you look at the league table for how Australia compares to other countries—we're the worst in the developed world. If this were a race under Prime Minister Scott Morrison's leadership, we wouldn't have even started. We wouldn't be out of the starting blocks. We are being lapped over and over again—not just by highly developed countries around the world that we like to compare ourselves to, but also by quite disadvantaged countries in the world. They are so far ahead of us in vaccination rates that it's not even funny. So, the fact that we have 10 million Australians in lockdown right now is direct evidence of this Prime Minister's failure to do his job. The fact that we now have jobs being lost again, businesses closing again and businesses going bankrupt again as a result of lockdowns is directly attributable to this Prime Minister's failure to do his job and to take the advice and suggestions of the opposition.</para>
<para>Over the last 12 months I've almost lost count of the number of constructive suggestions that the opposition has made to the government to try to get on top of COVID and to try to avoid the kind of damage that we are seeing across the country now. We were calling for wage subsidies long before the government caved in and agreed to JobKeeper. I heard Senator Brockman give himself and give his government a pat on the back about JobKeeper. Well, I also remember when the Prime Minister was saying that wage subsidies like JobKeeper were dangerous. And, because of the time that it took the government to get moving on JobKeeper is why we saw all of those queues outside Centrelink early last year, all of those jobs that people lost never to be recovered, because this Prime Minister and this government were so stubborn about a Labor idea.</para>
<para>We've seen it again when it comes to vaccines. We were calling for the government to do five or six vaccine deals with different companies, like what we've seen other countries do, but, no, they knew better. It was all about AstraZeneca with a little bit of Pfizer thrown in to top it up, and we all know how that went. If they'd only been prepared to listen to Labor's suggestion about doing deals with five or six companies, we would have many more millions of Australians vaccinated by now and we wouldn't be in lockdown in Sydney and we wouldn't be in lockdown in South-East Queensland with all of the job and business losses that come with it.</para>
<para>We suggested purpose-built quarantine stations, but, no, that couldn't happen because it was a Labor idea. We suggested a serious investment in home-grown manufacturing of mRNA vaccines, but, no, that couldn't happen because it was a Labor idea. We suggested a proper information campaign, particularly to multicultural communities where we are seeing high rates of COVID infections at the moment and low rates of vaccinations, but, no, that couldn't happen because it was a Labor idea. And it happened again yesterday when Labor again put a constructive suggestion forward about paying incentives to get people vaccinated, just like we're seeing in the US and across Europe and Asia. It's good enough for their governments and good enough for their people to have incentives for vaccination, and they're well ahead of us in terms of vaccination rates, but, no, it couldn't happen in Australia. Why? Because it was a Labor idea.</para>
<para>This Prime Minister and his government, at some point, have got to recognise that they've got to actually think about the national interest no matter who puts forward an idea. If it's an idea that's going to work, that's going to lift our vaccination rates, that's going to keep Australians safe, that's going to shield us from the immense economic harm that we are feeling around the country right now, then that good idea should be accepted no matter who suggests it. I don't care if the Prime Minister feels a bit embarrassed or a bit bad that he's having to rely on the opposition to put forward ideas rather than come up with his own—I just want these things done. If he wants to take credit for them, like he has done with JobKeeper even though he resisted it in the first place, well, fine, just do it, because that is the way that we will lift vaccination rates, keep Australians safe and keep Australians running their businesses and keep them in work. That's what matters. Again, his refusal to do so comes back to this stubbornness that we see over and over from the Prime Minister, his constant desire to play politics rather than put the national interest first. It comes back to that complacency we have seen from the Prime Minister and so many other ministers in this government over the last few months, best exemplified by that quote which will hang around his neck forever, 'It's not a race.' Well, we know where that has ended up.</para>
<para>So, on behalf of my family who are currently in lockdown in Brisbane, unable to go to their workplace, home schooling, and on behalf of every family in South-East Queensland or Sydney or anywhere else in the country that's going through lockdown right now, 'Thanks very much, Prime Minister. Maybe next time we put forward an idea you might like to actually hear it out and think about whether it would work rather than just dismiss it because it wasn't your own idea.' It's not about the Prime Minister putting his own vanity about whether he has an idea above the interests of the Australian people first. The interests of the Australian people should always come first, not the Prime Minister's vanity, not the source of an idea.</para>
<para>As I say, the Prime Minister's failure to do his job to get vaccines in arms and to build quarantine stations is having a direct impact right around the country at the moment, and day after day after day in local media we see examples of the kind of economic carnage that is being caused right now. I mentioned yesterday that, earlier in the week, before the South-East Queensland lockdown started, I met with representatives of the Gold Coast Airport. Their passenger numbers have fallen from about 80 per cent of pre-COVID levels—so they were starting to get back to pretty close to normal. The minute the Sydney and Melbourne lockdowns started, their passenger numbers fell to 10 per cent. That isn't just having an impact on the profits and workers at the Gold Coast Airport; that means there are fewer people coming into the Gold Coast, going to the hotels, going to the restaurants, going to the shops. So that is destroying the local economy across the Gold Coast.</para>
<para>It's the same in Cairns, where I was last week, meeting with tourism operators. And Port Douglas is one of the most popular tourist resorts in the country at this time of year and is usually full of people from Melbourne, particularly, escaping the dead of winter in Melbourne. Prior to the lockdowns interstate, they were at 85 per cent hotel occupancy. The minute the Melbourne and Sydney lockdowns started, their occupancy levels fell to 30 per cent. So that's going to put tourism workers out of work in Far North Queensland, and it's no doubt going to send many businesses to the wall, given they were barely hanging on in the first place.</para>
<para>These are the direct consequences of the Prime Minister failing to do his job. It is not an academic exercise. It is not a political point in a speech. It is about people's jobs, their livelihoods, their health and whether they can actually continue functioning, despite what is going on with COVID around the world. As I say, even today these problems continue to go on. I noticed today the chief operating officer of Village Roadshow Theme Parks on the Gold Coast was quoted in the in the Gold Coast Bulletin:</para>
<quote><para class="block">"Many small businesses are practically trading insolvent and in Village's case we are burning cash with our ongoing costs, which is a really significant burden," he said. "For us to survive, we need (government) support in lockdown, out of lockdown and it needs to go to December 31. I speak on behalf of every hotel, every accommodation house in this city, and of all the small business here who are in dire straits."</para></quote>
<para>Small businesses on the Gold Coast and across South-East Queensland are in dire straits because of Scott Morrison's lockdown, the lockdown that was caused because the Prime Minister didn't take it seriously, because he didn't think it was a race, because he didn't get people vaccinated and he didn't build quarantine stations. As I say, it's the same in Cairns, and I noticed it in last night's TV bulletins in Cairns. The head of Tourism Tropical North Queensland, Mr Mark Olsen, said: 'Without wage support, we will lose business forever.' Mr Ken Chapman, the head of Skyrail, one of the most popular tourist attractions in Far North Queensland, described the current situation as worse than 12 months ago, because back then they had JobKeeper. They don't have it now. In fact, because Far North Queensland is not currently locked down, they're not getting any support from this government. Their tourist numbers have fallen away, they've got businesses going to the wall because they were barely hanging on because of the last lockdowns, but now, because they are not in lockdown, there is not a dollar of financial support from the federal government to assist those businesses or those workers. It is not good enough.</para>
<para>This is the price of the Prime Minister's lockdown. This is the price of his not taking this seriously, of saying it's not a race, of not doing his two jobs, being to get people vaccinated and to build quarantine stations. In fact, the situation when it comes to vaccinations has been made really stark overnight with the release of new data from the federal government which shows just how low the vaccination rates, particularly in regional Queensland—and, no doubt, other parts of regional Australia—are. I will just give you a couple of examples. In Queensland right now, in the Mackay, Isaac and Whitsunday region, only 10 per cent of the population has been fully vaccinated. That means 90 per cent of the population in the Mackay, Isaac and Whitsunday region is not vaccinated, is at risk of getting COVID when it gets into the region, is at risk of a lockdown happening. That's a seat this government hold. They have the power to get vaccines there. We see them rort every other program under the sun—to get car parks in their electorates, to get sports grants in their electorates—but, when it comes to getting vaccines in the arms of their own constituents, in their own seats, they're the slowest in the state and the slowest in the country. Central Queensland is not much better, with 14.7 of the population fully vaccinated. Even more worryingly, in South-East Queensland, which is currently in lockdown because of a spate of delta variant vaccinations, in the Logan-Beaudesert region, only 13.2 per cent of the population is vaccinated—13.2 per cent of the population vaccinated in an area that is currently locked down and is at high risk of COVID outbreaks emerging. And it's not much better anywhere else in Queensland. So we need this Prime Minister and this government to take this seriously and to finally get vaccinations happening.</para>
<para>Labor supports this bill and we support these payments being made. If the government had done its job, it wouldn't have ever happened. But we are here. There are nevertheless a few gaps in terms of these payments, which we have been taking up with the government and which need to be addressed. Under this system, workers aged under 17 are unable to access the payment. My office has heard from young apprentices who don't qualify for these payments even though they are out of work. Workers living outside of COVID hot-spot declared areas but forced to lock down are not eligible. Sole traders and microbusinesses have fallen between the gaps, as well as casuals who are not scheduled for work. There is still work to be done and the government needs to get on with it. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SIEWERT</name>
    <name.id>e5z</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I would like to make a contribution to the debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021. This bill is the latest example of the government failing to adequately provide support to people suffering from the devastating impacts of lockdown. This bill allows the Treasurer to make rules for economic response payments during lockdowns between July this year and December 2022.</para>
<para>The economic and social impacts of lockdown are harmful. Lockdowns are especially harmful for the most vulnerable members of our community, including disabled people, carers, single parents and people without work. At the beginning of the pandemic, the Morrison government did something that, frankly, we never expected them to do. They raised JobKeeper to $1,115 a fortnight, doubling, in fact, the JobSeeker payment. This transformed the lives of thousand of people. For the first time in years, these people could afford to pay rent, buy medications and have three meals a day. It enabled them to survive the lockdowns of last year.</para>
<para>The Greens warned the government not to reduce JobSeeker back to the level of the poverty line when they decided they had provided enough support and we were coming out of the pandemic. We warned the government that people would need to access adequate income support as the pandemic continued. Instead, the government chose to condemn millions of people on income support to living in poverty. When the latest outbreaks occurred the government was dragged kicking and screaming to provide additional supports. These supports are inadequate, and, when they first came in, they ignored those living on income support, leaving them out in the cold.</para>
<para>More than five weeks into the Sydney lockdown, the government has finally provided some limited support to people in lockdown on income support payments. However, to qualify for the additional payment of $200, people on income support payments need to have lost at least eight hours of work. This means 350,000 people on income support in Greater Sydney missed out on critical support. These people, through no fault of their own, cannot find work. Once again, they are being punished by the government simply because they cannot find work. Of course, they cannot find work in the pandemic either—it's worse. I'm concerned that this number will only keep growing as the lockdown continues in Sydney and the threat of lockdown looms over other states and territories. At any time, any state or territory could go into lockdown because the Prime Minister hasn't secured enough vaccinations and hasn't fixed hotel quarantining.</para>
<para>I would like to take this opportunity to foreshadow a second reading amendment in my name that Senator Hanson-Young will move for me that outlines our concerns with the government's broad approach that continues to leave people behind. It will address people on income support and the fact that they have been ignored and are not getting additional support. It will outline the fact that it is very difficult for 350,000 people to try and survive on $44 a day. It outlines the fact that, if we want to ensure that people stay home, they need to extend support for all people on income support. It deals with the issue that people who have lost fewer than eight hours of work continue to be excluded from the payment. It also deals with the fact that all income support payments should be increased above the poverty line and that everybody who has lost work should be given adequate support, with access to the full JobKeeper rate, so that everyone is supported through this pandemic.</para>
<para>Almost half the people on the JobSeeker payment have an illness or disability. Many will need to isolate and require extra services like grocery or medication delivery. How can they afford to do this living below the poverty line? I'm very worried about disabled people and older women, who make up a significant proportion of the people on the JobSeeker payment. I'm very concerned that they will not be able to afford the basics during the lockdowns that are going on now and into the future. You cannot on the one hand say that people should stay at home and then on the other hand not provide adequate support for people to do so. This haphazard approach to managing the economic fallout of this pandemic is damaging our communities that are in extremely stressful situations because the government simply did not have an adequate plan.</para>
<para>By introducing the COVID supplement of an extra $550 a fortnight for people on JobSeeker and youth allowance payments at the beginning of the payment in March last year, the government acknowledged that $40, at that time, was never enough to survive on, and neither is the now changed payment of just $44 a day. It is not enough to live on. We know it's forcing people to live in poverty, and people are now expected to be living in poverty in lockdown situations. Particularly if they're vulnerable, they aren't able to go out and buy groceries and essentials; they have to pay extra. We know from the last lockdown that costs increased significantly for people living on income support. People in New South Wales will be going through lockdown without the means to afford essentials. It will be the same in other states like Queensland if, unfortunately, they have to go into lockdown. This is cruel and should not be happening in a country as wealthy as Australia. If we want people to be able to feed, clothe and house themselves, they need a payment of $80 a day. We will keep campaigning to achieve this for people doing it tough on income support.</para>
<para>To keep everyone safe, the government must ensure that everybody can afford to stay at home. Income support is a public health emergency. People who cannot afford to stay home are at greater risk of getting COVID and spreading it. We should be doing absolutely everything we can to support these people. Instead of income support above the poverty line, we have a government prioritising tax cuts for the rich. We have them giving handouts to their billionaire mates while the most vulnerable members of our community are condemned to living in poverty. This is appalling. To support people to stay at home and follow public health orders, the government must provide COVID disaster payments to everybody on income support—everybody on JobSeeker, youth allowance, DSP and the carer payment—not just those who have lost work. Of course people who have lost work need that additional support, but everybody should receive additional support. We had adequate income support at the height of the pandemic last year. We desperately need it back again.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SCARR</name>
    <name.id>282997</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to rise in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021. Before I go into some detailed comments I'd like to provide some initial observations.</para>
<para>The first is this. There are a small number of people in this country who are in very high positions of authority who are doing the best they can in extraordinarily difficult circumstances to make decisions, to make choices—in many cases they are choices between options neither of which would be preferable in the usual times—and they're having to make those calls and those choices in real-time, based on the best evidence and advice that they can secure. I think it is incumbent upon all of us, especially those of us who are not in executive positions, to demonstrate a little bit of empathy for people who are in leadership positions and who are doing the best they can in very trying circumstances. I extend that principle to those in executive or leadership positions, whether or not they are in leadership positions in a parliamentary sense or in a Public Service sense, such as those in our police forces, other emergency organisations, business organisations, the union movement, right across the board, and I extend that empathy to everyone in those positions, regardless of their political colours. We're all Australians and we're doing the best we can in the extraordinary circumstances of a once-in-100-years pandemic. That needs to be acknowledged at the outset. I don't think it helps or is in the national interest for the rhetoric to get out of control in that regard and for it to seek to link specific health outcomes with the performance of individuals when those who are making those statements and those comments know that individuals in those positions are making decisions on the basis of the best scientific advice that they can obtain and the best expert advice that they can obtain. Are they getting it perfect? Does anyone ever get it perfect? Where did this expectation that we're going to achieve perfection in terms of responding to a situation like COVID-19 come from?</para>
<para>Certainly, those opposite need to perform their role of keeping the government accountable. That's their role, absolutely, and I respect that deeply, but I think at times we all need to consider our rhetoric and whether or not it's in the national interest when the rhetoric gets out of control and, I think, goes beyond that which is necessary for us to discharge our functions. Communication needs to be measured and respectful. It needs to take into account the fact that different Australians under great stress at this point in time are saying and doing things which they might consider are correct and right. We need to extend respect and empathy to every single Australian in our country at this point in time and seek to unite our country, not to divide it, and I apply that principle with respect to all communication by stakeholders, including those in the political sphere. It's so important that at this point in time our language unites us, not divides us.</para>
<para>My friend Senator Watt from Queensland said the Prime Minister had only two jobs. I bet the Prime Minister wishes he had only two jobs, but unfortunately, the reality is extraordinarily different. At this time in our nation's history we're in a position where we have to face certainty of security issues, especially in our region. We are living in a challenging world in that respect. The Prime Minister tomorrow will deliver a <inline font-style="italic">Closing the gap</inline> report in relation to Indigenous health, education and economic participation in our society. There's the issue of our veterans, and those of us who were present in the chamber yesterday saw the very animated discussion with respect to issues relating to veterans and veteran suicide. There are a plethora of jobs, a plethora of responsibilities that come with being the Prime Minister of this country, and I think that needs to be respected.</para>
<para>Secondly, I say to Senator Watt that I think it is grossly unfair—grossly unfair—to connect our Prime Minister with a particular lockdown situation. I think it is grossly unfair and, from my perspective, it is an example of the rhetoric exceeding what is called for in a respectful constitutional democracy. I think it's just not called for. The fact of the matter is that the lockdown has arisen from the delta variant of the COVID-19 virus. That's the cause, and one only has to look at countries all over the world to see that every country on the face of this planet is having to confront this delta variant of the COVID-19 virus and the disruption that it causes to economies and societies. It is extraordinarily unfair and unhelpful to seek to link our Prime Minister to a particular lockdown. To be frank, when the rhetoric gets out of control, when the rhetoric goes beyond what is reasonable and rational, it actually undermines constructive points that are made by those on any side of the chamber. When the rhetoric is overblown, it undermines whatever is constructive and positive in senators' contributions to debates in this chamber. I think that needs to be recognised.</para>
<para>Senator Watt quite legitimately wanted us to consider the issue of the $300 cash incentive for people to get vaccinated. Let's consider that on a fair and reasonable basis. On the one hand, one can see the prima facie argument for offering $300 to someone and that that will provide them with an incentive to get vaccinated and, by reason of their getting vaccinated, that will decrease the chances that they're going to get COVID-19 and therefore decrease the risk of transmitting it to someone else. That is how the $300 payment is being justified. Let's accept that on face value. But let's also accept on face value that there are arguments against the utility of that proposal. I want to run through a few of those arguments. As at 2 August 2021, 8,537,516 Australians had received one dose of a vaccine and 4,061,924 had received two doses of a vaccine. Taking on board the constructive suggestion and that the intent is constructive, we would be paying $300 to 4,061,924 who've already received two doses of the vaccine. That equates to something in the region of $1.2 billion. I don't see the public policy argument to pay $1.2 billion to people who've already done what you're trying to incentivise them to do. I just don't see the public policy argument in trying to motivate people to do something that they've already done.</para>
<para>In the case of the 8.5 million people who've received their first dose, if we extended the $300 cash bonus to them, that would be $2.55 billion in payments. Those 8.5 million people have already demonstrated their intention to go through with the vaccination program. I'm one of those as I've had my first AstraZeneca shot, and my second one is scheduled for the first week of September. Again, it is hard to justify why you would be paying $300 incentives to someone who has already demonstrated that they're going through the process of getting vaccinated. If we add the $2.5 billion to the $1.2 billion, we get $3.7 billion that would be paid under Labor's proposal to pay $300 to people who are vaccinated by 1 December. So, on a public policy basis, on a public policy argument, we've got to consider the opportunity cost of that $3.7 billion and how it could be better spent. Senator Siewert, to whom I listen very carefully whenever she makes a contribution in this place because of her passion for those Australians who are in difficult positions, is certainly recognised by me.</para>
<para>Surely to goodness we should be deploying that $3.7 billion to assist Australians who are in specific difficulty and who need that support, whether that's through mental health support, through augmenting disability services, in case of jurisdictions which are in lockdown, or through providing targeted and proportionate assistance to small business. The $3.7 billion which Labor proposes to use to pay people who have received either one or two vaccine doses could be far better spent in terms of targeted support to people who genuinely need it at this point in time. Our response needs to be proportionate, targeted and temporary. Those are the guiding principles which the Australian government has adopted throughout this pandemic, and they are the principles which should continue to guide our public policy decision-making in that regard.</para>
<para>The bill before the Senate has five schedules. The first schedule provides the power for the Treasurer to make rules for economic response payments to provide support to an entity where it is adversely affected by restrictions imposed by a state or territory to control COVID-19, and it applies to all states and territories equally, as it should. Whether it's Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland or wherever, the same rules should apply. Those amendments are required so that those rules can be introduced in a timely and efficient way to ensure the support starts flowing as quickly as possible. Schedule 2 provides for the disclosure of tax information to Australian government agencies to facilitate COVID-19 business support programs. That's clearly something which is warranted. Schedule 3 deals with the taxation of business support. Payments received by eligible businesses under certain COVID-19 business support programs administered by the Commonwealth government will be non-assessable, non-exempt income so that the payments will not be subject to tax. It's very important that that clarity is provided as soon as possible so that those who are providing financial advice to small businesses are able to do so with some certainty. We should always remember that this is an extraordinary measure for extraordinary times. Schedule 4 provides for a modification power, which essentially provides flexibility to adjust information and documentary requirements in order to ensure the continuation of business transactions and government service delivery. Schedule 5 provides, again, for tax exemptions for COVID-19 disaster payments, in this case those payments received by individuals, from the 2020-21 income year onwards so that those payments are free from income tax.</para>
<para>In summary, this is another step in the process of the government responsibly dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic—a once-in-100-years pandemic—and it applies the principles which the government has applied throughout its COVID-19 pandemic response: temporary, targeted and proportionate assistance to those who need it most.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator POLLEY</name>
    <name.id>e5x</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I join the debate today speaking on the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021. Labor is supportive of any measures to help Australians, including people in my home state of Tasmania, to get through this pandemic as unscathed as possible. With further lockdowns expected, due to the incompetence of Scott Morrison and his tired, eight-year-old government, more economic measures are necessary. Scott Morrison has had two jobs throughout this pandemic—firstly to roll out the vaccine and secondly to build a fit-for-purpose quarantine system—and he has failed at both. Business support payments, as outlined in this bill and other bills, are crucial if we are to get the economy back on track. Labor will not stand in the way of support for businesses trying to make ends meet during a global pandemic.</para>
<para>The Australian people know too well that this tired and old Morrison government has mishandled the pandemic. Those opposite have mishandled the rollout of the vaccine and they have mishandled quarantine. To this day, only 15.4 per cent of Australians have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19. This is not a figure to boast about. Let there be no confusion here: the only reason this legislation is before the Senate today is because of the Morrison government's failure to bring this pandemic under control. Whether it's through the vaccine rollout, hotel quarantine or cutting off JobKeeper too early, this government has failed workers and failed businesses. This government is good at one thing: looking after its mates. The government has been more than content handing out $22 million of taxpayers' money to Harvey Norman to fill their coffers while people have been left outside in the dark without any real support from this government at a time when they most need it. Every Australian feels for their fellow Australians in New South Wales and Queensland at the moment. Our thoughts have been with them throughout the pandemic, just as they were with the Victorian community when they were forced into a number of lockdowns.</para>
<para>The delta strain presents new challenges, but these challenges should have been foreseen by this government. We were always going to run into trouble when so few Australians have been vaccinated. With only 3.89 million Australians fully vaccinated, delta was always going to threaten lives—and now it's not just threatening them, it's taking them. For many workers and small businesses in New South Wales and Queensland, support has been too little and too late. Businesses are closing their doors—closing them for good. All of this was avoidable, but now, because of Mr Morrison's incompetence, we don't know whether we're going to be able to stop it. The majority of Australians wouldn't be out of pocket if it weren't for the Morrison government's failures on rolling out the vaccine and quarantine.</para>
<para>Mr Morrison said the vaccine rollout isn't a race. He's wrong. It is a race, and Australians are paying the price for his failure. He may want to use the Olympic terminology about racing, but the reality is that this Prime Minister has been found wanting—demonstrating no leadership at all. Every Australian knows it's been a race to beat the pandemic. Every Australian knows it's been a race that we needed to win. Only yesterday, every newspaper across the country declared that it is a race. After reading some of that media, Mr Morrison has come to accept the fact that it has been a race.</para>
<para>Mr Morrison left many workers and industries out in the cold. Frontline workers in retail and hospitality have not been valued the way they should be. He doesn't value truckies, who have delivered the goods and kept the services that we needed moving throughout this country. He doesn't value our airline industry and the workforce that keeps Australians in the skies. He doesn't value local government workers or the arts community—and I spoke yesterday about the lack of support to the university and tertiary education sector in this country. And then there are the aged-care and disability carers. They've been last on Mr Morrison's list to be vaccinated. It's an absolute tragedy. People want their Prime Minister to fight for them. They want to know that their Prime Minister has their backs—and, frankly, they're realising that this Prime Minister doesn't; he shirks his responsibilities. Remember when the Prime Minister told the Australian community that he 'doesn't hold a hose'? Mr Morrison, you need to take responsibility. There needs to be a network of purpose-built quarantine facilities across the country.</para>
<para>What have we seen from this government? There's been no leadership whatsoever. It can't even roll out the vaccine in a timely manner. They were late getting out of the starting blocks in ordering vaccines and making sure we had the supplies from the outset. Right now, in the biggest crisis facing our community and the world in over a century, the Prime Minister has been unable to communicate a vision for Australians to be fully vaccinated so that we are out of lockdowns for good. When a healthy woman in her 30s dies because of COVID-19, and Australia had the opportunity to eradicate this virus with a successful rollout of the vaccine, that is an unmitigated disaster and a huge failure of this leadership—and my heart goes out to the families of those who have lost their lives. More recently, there is the impact that delta has had on so many young people and now children.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister is not solely responsible. He doesn't have to shoulder all the blame, because the minister for health, Mr Greg Hunt, should also be held accountable. At no other time in our history would a minister survive in his job when it is so obvious that he has failed to carry out his job—as minister for health during this pandemic. Mr Hunt will go down in history as the worst health minister that Australia has ever seen. People in Australia are still dying because of active decisions made by Mr Hunt throughout the mishandling of this outbreak, and yet he's still the minister for health.</para>
<para>We also have the Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services, Mr Richard Colbeck, who has failed older Australians over such a long period of time. He has failed the aged-care sector, firstly, by being reluctant to ensure that all the recommendations of the royal commission into the aged-care sector are adopted by this government and implemented in a very timely manner. Now he has mishandled the pandemic. They were warned about the serious nature of COVID-19 early enough to ensure that those in the aged-care sector were protected. I have to remind you of the tragic circumstances in 2020, when 685 older Australians died because of COVID-19 infections in residential aged care, despite, as I said, those early warnings that these sites were highly vulnerable. We also have dismal vaccination rates for people in disability homes and for disability carers, with only one-third currently vaccinated.</para>
<para>Why aren't these ministers being held accountable for their failures in their ministerial duties to keep Australians safe? If Australia had rolled out the vaccine and installed nationally coordinated vaccination and quarantine systems, Australians would not be dying again. Fourteen million Australians would not be forced into another avoidable breakdown of their businesses and their livelihoods, and they would not be in lockdown right now. This is destroying their livelihoods, the family businesses. There is the harm this is doing to their mental health. Scott Morrison's ministers should be and must be held accountable. I'm calling for the resignations of Mr Hunt and Senator Colbeck. They should be sacked by the Prime Minister. Instead, Lieutenant General John James Frewen has been brought in to cover for Mr Morrison's failure and for his ministers' failures.</para>
<para>It is unacceptable that we have this second-rate Prime Minister who continues to fail to take responsibility for his own failings. He blames everyone but himself in communicating with the people of Australia. Mr Morrison didn't negotiate enough vaccine deals early enough. That's a fact. He failed to heed the early warning signs and protect older Australians in aged-care homes—fact. He has failed to protect aged-care and disability workers—fact. He has failed to protect teachers, retail workers and transport workers—fact. He has failed to bring back JobKeeper and to keep Australians safe—unfortunately, another fact.</para>
<para>I'm angry that people's lives are still at risk because we have a prime minister bereft of any leadership tendencies whatsoever. We have a Prime Minister who has only ever been worried about his own job and how he is perceived. People's lives are not only at risk but their mental wellbeing is as well. We do not know the full impacts of people's mental health but we will see that transpire over the coming months. While New South Wales and Queensland are in lockdown it hurts the entire country. Tasmania may be in its quietest season for tourism, but we rely on mainlanders travelling to our great state to see and taste our world renowned cuisine. We rely on our mainland brothers and sisters and neighbours to stay for a few—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>10000</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We seem to have lost Senator Polley on the video link. Senator Roberts.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>266524</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia I speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021. This bill is notable for what it is not. Before financing economic response packages using taxpayer funds, government must pay taxpayers the respect and courtesy of a comprehensive definition of the problem being addressed and then a comprehensive detailed plan to which taxpayers and our parliament can hold the government accountable. Yet state and federal governments are lurching from one COVID event to another with no detailed plan. This breeds confusion, duplication, waste and, as we've seen, contradictions within and between governments that are, in plain language, stupid and leave taxpayers incredulous.</para>
<para>This is driving fear, confusion, frustration, insecurity and anger between, within and across our country and our communities. Everyday Australians have had a gutful of states blaming and bickering with each other and with the federal government while imposing capricious, arbitrary COVID lockdowns and restrictions, killing businesses, killing employment and killing our economy—and killing people. People are crying out for leadership, competence and integrity. People need to be heard and they want a proper plan.</para>
<para>What's involved in a comprehensive plan for managing a virus? It starts with data, truth and care. In March and April 2020 I spoke in the Senate and indicated that after seeing reports of tens of thousands of deaths in Italy, Spain, France and China we would vote with the COVID-19 measures the government introduced. At the time, I repeatedly warned the government that in the months ahead we would hold the government accountable. I expected them to provide the people with data and with a proper, detailed plan for their COVID response. I've been holding government accountable since May 2020 yet we've still not seen a proper, detailed plan. The government has not even shared the underpinning data on the virus characteristics nor the Doherty Institute modelling nor the erroneous, flawed UK modelling on which the Doherty modelling is based. Yet the government has splashed a huge bucket of taxpayer cash, hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money, like swill.</para>
<para>Economic measures need to be based on a solid plan. In Senate estimates hearings in March and May this year, the chief medical officer and head of the federal Department of Health both agreed with my list of strategies for a proper plan to manage the virus. There are seven strategies. The first is isolation, lockdowns and national border closure, only initially. The second is testing, tracing and quarantining of the sick and the vulnerable. The third is restrictions, such as social distancing and masks. The fourth is injections, vaccines, provided they are properly and fully tested and safe. The fifth is treatments using cures and prophylactics. The sixth is personal behaviour, such as washing hands. They added that one. The seventh strategy is health and fitness. Both health officials confirmed that my list is complete. It does not miss anything. It does not contain anything that should not be in a plan. All these seven strategies need to be considered. I'll return to this list in a minute.</para>
<para>I asked these officials for data characterising the virus, in terms of severity or mortality and transmissibility. I specified clearly that I wanted data relative to past respiratory diseases, such as SARS, MERS and severe flus, including the 1918 Spanish flu and the 1997 H5N1 avian flu. Their later written answer included a diagram showing that, while COVID-19 is highly transmissible—highly contagious—its severity is low to moderate. I'll say that again: its severity is low to moderate. The diagram does not show that some people with COVID-19 have no symptoms. Many people diagnosed with COVID show symptoms typical of flu. A small group with comorbidities can die. Having that breakdown into groups is crucial to having a proper plan for managing the virus. Where is that breakdown? Why has government not shared this data with the people.</para>
<para>By the way, Texas and Florida have opened their economies and removed COVID measures, including lockdowns, masks and business closures. These jurisdictions have experienced a pattern of infection, hospital admission and mortality almost identical to that of other US states that are still in lockdown. After Florida's only lockdown, Governor DeSantis apologised to his residents, and he has had no further lockdowns despite Florida having a high proportion of aged residents.</para>
<para>So how many of the seven strategies are our governments adopting? Firstly, the states are capriciously using lockdowns, killing our economy, killing small business, killing the regions and killing people through increased suicides and attempted suicides. That's slamming a trillion-dollar debt on Australians not yet born. Even the UN's World Health Organization, a corrupt, incompetent and dishonest body, now admits lockdowns are a blunt instrument to be used only initially to get control of a virus. In continuing to use lockdowns, states are revealing they have not mastered the virus. Instead, the virus is managing the states. Six days ago, the New South Wales Deputy Premier and Leader of the Nationals openly admitted that the New South Wales state government has no clue what is happening with lockdowns. We welcome his honesty.</para>
<para>Lockdowns are a form of controlling people, useful for increasing widespread fear. Fear is a weapon not only for control; it's used to win elections. Invoking a crisis is a well-known tactic to help incumbent governments. The federal government's partially closed national borders are a form of isolation, yet there are valid, proven strategies for better managing this that are based on data. Due to a looming election, it seems the Prime Minister has taken a lesson from Queensland, the Northern Territory and WA, which ramped up fear of the virus before state elections to invoke the power of incumbency and fear. What a disgrace! When politicians and media talk about the cost of COVID, they are lying. The truth is it's the cost of politically driven, capricious government restrictions that are not based on data.</para>
<para>The second strategy is testing, tracing and quarantining of the sick and vulnerable. Although improving, testing and tracing in Australia have been poor. Vulnerable people are largely not adequately and fairly quarantined. Taiwan, though, a small island crammed with a population similar to Australia's, has achieved an amazing performance with no interruption to its economy and no legacy debt. Taiwan did not lock up everyone. Instead, it protected the sick and the vulnerable. Taiwan's economy continued to hum along because this proven strategy cut COVID's economic costs.</para>
<para>The third strategy is restrictions such as masks and social distancing. Remember: initially there were not enough masks available, and authorities here and overseas told us that masks were not important. Yet later, when masks became available, the same authorities told us masks are vital. When Queensland's health minister earlier this year forced mask use, she was asked whether drivers alone in cars by themselves would have to wear masks. She clearly had no clue and then hesitatingly said, 'Mm, yes.' When Brisbane, in one corner of our state, had three COVID-19 cases in January this year, the Labor government mandated masks across the entire state, including in the tiny town of Bamaga, 2,700 kilometres away in our state's northern tip, where there were no cases at all. Masks are becoming a form of conditioning people to follow orders and to submit to government.</para>
<para>Vaccines or injections are the fourth strategy. The federal Chief Medical Officer, the head of the federal health department and the head of the Therapeutic Goods Administration have all refused to guarantee the safety of these expensive injections. There have been reversals of advice, and the public is now afraid and hesitant. Health authorities do not know the dosage needed, don't know the number and frequency of doses and admit that injections will not prevent transmission of the virus, will not stop people getting the virus and will not end restrictions. The effect on children in the womb and on future generations is not known. The long-term effects on people injected are not known. Why the hell are the government injecting with an untested, unproven drug?</para>
<para>Serious adverse effects, including deaths, due to the injections have occurred here, and overseas thousands of people have died. Governments, state and federal, have repeatedly contradicted their own earlier advice and assurances. Federal health minister Greg Hunt publically admitted, 'The world is engaged in the largest clinical vaccination trial.' We're not lab rats. Governments are using threats of digital passports, or, as I call them, digital prisons, that withdraw services and prevent access to work and to livelihoods, to travel and to events. Government wants to remove basic freedoms. No wonder vaccination hesitancy is spreading across our country. Never before have Western governments injected healthy people with a substance that can kill.</para>
<para>The fifth strategy is that, at the same time, our government is depriving us of Ivermectin, a known treatment and preventative for COVID-19. This would dramatically reduce costs—the need for packages. Over a period of 60 years and for various diseases, Ivermectin has proven safe in 3.7 billion doses. It's already approved in Australia to treat a number of health conditions. In April last year, I raised the topic of promising Ivermectin in vitro trials on COVID in Melbourne, yet the government has done nothing. Ivermectin is easily affordable and over the last year overseas has become a highly successful and proven treatment for COVID, plus over 40 medical scientific papers now hail Ivermectin's success. Prominent doctors across many fields of medicine, including immunology and respiratory diseases, advocate Ivermectin for treating COVID-19. Yet the federal government in Australia sits on its hands, is not exploring Ivermectin's potential and refuses to authorise its use for COVID. The government is ignoring a proven medicine that could end this virus's reign, as it has overseas. The government again has blood on its hands. Overseas, this proven strategy is drastically cutting COVID's economic costs and keeps people healthy and economies healthy.</para>
<para>Ivermectin has one hurdle though. Its use will eliminate the hundreds of billions of dollars revenue for vaccine makers from vaccines that bypass standard testing and approval processes.</para>
<para>The sixth strategy is personal hygiene, such as hand washing, personal behaviour and practical actions. It's the same as for stopping the flu or a cold, another strain of coronavirus.</para>
<para>The seventh strategy is health and fitness. Obesity and other diseases increase the risk of COVID-19, yet government has done nothing. Although this is mostly personal responsibility, there's a role for government providing data and advice.</para>
<para>Of the seven strategies that senior federal health officials confirmed the government is relying on only one expensive strategy of injections with known adverse health effects and on the partial closure of borders. Instead of data, governments are pushing fear. Instead of a detailed plan, governments are pushing paranoia. Instead of strengthening our economy, governments are lining big pharmas' pockets. COVID-19 exposed our country's core, atrocious state and federal governance—atrocious and deadly.</para>
<para>Governments talk now about a new COVID normal. That is rubbish. If governments cared and wanted us to feel safe, they would have an end-to-end solution for COVID, a solid, detailed plan based on solid data and specifying what actions will be taken, why they will be taken, when they will be taken, where they will be taken, who will be responsible and how they will be taken—a solid plan. Before an economic package is produced, there must be a plan. Then it must be costed and a business and health case made for it. When organisations, whether a business or a government or a not-for-profit, work to a plan, the plan can always be changed as circumstances change and more data comes in, yet our state and federal Liberal, Labor and Nationals governments have never attempted to make a detailed plan. That shows that Liberal and Labor and Nationals governments do not care about people's health and lives, do not respect the taxpayers of Australia, do not provide solid governance.</para>
<para>Governance of an entity, any entity, has three aspects. First is trusteeship for the entities' values, yet governments are trashing Australian values. Second is custodianship for the entity's future, for those Australians not yet born, yet governments are trashing our children's future and burdening them with a trillion dollars of avoidable debt. Third is stewardship for the entities' resources, yet governments are wasting taxpayer funds and killing our country's productive capacity. Instead, the government in this bill is just going to spend taxpayer money and tell other departments who they're giving it to. This is not a plan. It's an excuse to splash cash and not be accountable. It will motivate unaccountable premiers to waste more taxpayer money while destroying our country's tax base. It's the very opposite of our Constitution's foundation: instead of competitive federalism we are having yet another example of competitive welfarism. The core issue this bill perpetuates is shoddy governance, atrocious governance.</para>
<para>Repeatedly, this government shows it cannot plan. That means it cannot govern. It is based on hollow marketing slogans. Its intent is to look good, not to do good. It aims to be re-elected, not to serve. The only thing this government has going for it is Anthony Albanese and the Labor Party. This bill discusses government making 'disaster payments'. It dishonestly does not discuss the fact that state and federal government caused the disaster.</para>
<para>Australia needs honest, competent, consistent leadership using solid data. Government needs to serve the people and serve Australia's national interest. We need to restore governance that cares for people's lives, cares for people's livelihoods, cares for people's security and cares for people's future. We need governance that cares for our country's security, our country's values, our country's economy and our country's future. We need a government that is honest and that serves the people. We have one flag above this parliament, we are one community and we are one nation.</para>
<para>We will be supporting one of the Greens second reading amendments, to recover financial support from entities paying executive bonuses, and Senator Patrick's third reading amendment to instil a register of entities— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CHANDLER</name>
    <name.id>264449</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak in favour of the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021. Right at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, back at the start of 2020, it was clear that Australia would be facing not only the impacts of a global health crisis but also a global economic crisis. In my home state of Tasmania, where, with perhaps the exception of the north-west coast, we have been incredibly fortunate in avoiding much of the health crisis, it was the economic concerns and the concerns from small-business owners that I was first hearing on the ground when this pandemic first took hold in Australia.</para>
<para>As well as the unprecedented challenge of keeping Australians safe, governments had to face the prospect of restrictions on movement, restrictions in consumer confidence and the closure of international borders putting extreme pressure on many businesses and many industries. Since the beginning of 2020, we have seen all of those fears come to pass and then more. Businesses small, medium and large in every state and territory have at different times and to differing degrees been affected. There have been times when businesses have been unable to open or operate for weeks and months on end, particularly in Victoria last year during the major outbreak and lockdown. We're again seeing that happen in New South Wales and South-East Queensland as I speak in here right now.</para>
<para>Of course, we also need to remember that it's not just the businesses directly situated in outbreak areas that are being affected. As we've come into 2021 and lockdowns have been more isolated, that has certainly been a recurring theme. It's not like 12 months ago when most of the country was in lockdown; with isolated lockdowns we are now understanding and learning more about the impacts on not only those regions that are in lockdown but also those regions outside of lockdown. My home state of Tasmania is an excellent example of this. Tourism and hospitality businesses in Tasmania have been significantly affected by the inability of visitors from Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland and other parts of Australia at times to enter the state over the winter period.</para>
<para>It's interesting to note that, particularly with the Victorian lockdown and the New South Wales lockdowns, the contrast has been really stark. It's quite stark seeing the impact on the number of people out in the streets enjoying all that Tasmania has to offer when, all of a sudden, two of our most populous states—and two states that clearly consist of people who love coming to Tasmania—aren't able to come here. I know that it's a similar situation for tourism businesses all around Australia, whether or not they're in lockdown areas. We've heard a lot in the debate in the chamber on this particular bill around the impact on tourism areas in Queensland. Our hearts go out to those areas at the moment, even the ones that aren't in lockdown. The tourism industry is an example of an industry which I think is going to need well targeted, carefully thought-out support over the coming months.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, it's clear that the threat of COVID-19 and the restrictions that follow aren't going to magically disappear overnight. As much as we'd like to think so, we aren't going to wake up one day and suddenly be back in situation normal. We need to continue to pursue the important vaccination thresholds that will provide a pathway back towards normal life. Yesterday the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, outlined an incredibly important plan, which has been agreed to in principle by the national cabinet. It is built on the clear premise that getting vaccinated is the pathway to making lockdowns, border closures and restrictions a thing of the past. More than 12½ million vaccine doses have now been administered, and we are now hitting well over a million doses administered every week. A total of 4½ million vaccinations were given in July, which is more than double that achieved in May, when 2.1 million doses were administered. It is particularly pleasing to see how eager Australians around my age are to do their bit and get vaccinated so we can advance towards the 70 and 80 per cent vaccination thresholds as soon as possible. I know that the announcement that young people who might not otherwise have been eligible for the Pfizer vaccine were able to go to their local GP and have a conversation about getting an AstraZeneca vaccine was incredibly welcomed by young people my age. Young people, particularly those living in the areas of Melbourne and Sydney, who are more prone to lockdowns were saying, 'Let me get vaccinated. I just want to get vaccinated. Let me take personal responsibility for my health and get the vaccine so I can play my part in protecting the rest of my community.'</para>
<para>Despite the progress on the vaccination rollout and the pathway back to normal, there is still a way to go. It is clear that there will continue to be situations over the coming months where businesses are heavily impacted by COVID and are unable to operate as usual. Just as we've done with Commonwealth support programs like JobKeeper, which saved so many businesses from going under and kept millions of Australians in employment, the government will continue to be there to support employees and businesses. You can see that in the assistance that we are providing in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland as they grapple with the current outbreaks in their states. Of course, state governments are also doing their bit to support businesses and employees affected by outbreaks and lockdowns.</para>
<para>One of the lessons of the pandemic, whether it's in relation to health responses or economic responses, is that we need to be adaptable and flexible in responding to specific situations. A lot has been said in here by those on the other side, who think that the government should have had a crystal ball or had a tarot card reading and known exactly how this pandemic was going to play out from the word go. Apparently, as soon as this virus was on our shores, we should have got off the wall the book that said, 'This is how we deal with the COVID 19 pandemic,' and followed the instruction manual. This pandemic is unprecedented. We have not gone through something like this in 100 years, and to be perfectly frank, I suspect that 100 years ago we would have dealt with things quite differently, because technology, medicine and all of these things were at a completely different point. Every time I've come into this place to talk about our COVID 19 response, whether it has been our economic response and the support that we provided to individuals and businesses across this country or our health response and the work that our government is doing to ensure that the vaccine is rolled out in a timely fashion, I have focused on the fact that this pandemic is unprecedented. If you think back to January last year, when we were first hearing about this thing called coronavirus, which came to Australia at the end of January, a lot of people thought: 'What is this going to be? Is this going to be like the swine flu or the avian flu of 10 years ago? Is it just going to be a bit of a cold? What is going to be the impact?</para>
<para>How transmissible is it going to be?' This was something that we weren't even sure of in those early days. This was a novel coronavirus. We and other countries have had to invest significant time and significant resources into research to help us to understand the impacts of this virus and how it's going to affect our community.</para>
<para>We need to be adaptable and we have been adaptable. The entire point of the JobKeeper subsidy was that we designed a program that would be adaptable to the situations that we found ourselves in, adaptable to the fact that some businesses were experiencing a significant downturn in their business, while others were not. We have designed programs that are scalable and adaptable, based on the fact that this is an unprecedented situation. We need to make sure that we have the right settings in place so that this financial assistance can be rolled out as efficiently and effectively as possible. It needs to get to where it needs to go to support the businesses and employees who are in need. Fundamentally, that is what the legislation that we are discussing today seeks to do. It will tailor the economic response and the support that our government is providing to those who really need it as we move through the pandemic and beyond a point where our entire country is in lockdown to figuring out what to do when smaller geographical locations around our great country are affected.</para>
<para>To understand how this legislation does target our financial assistance to ensure that it is rolled out in an effective manner, I want to go through the details of the legislation. Schedule 1 to the bill amends the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act to allow the Treasurer, Mr Josh Frydenberg, to make rules for economic response payments to provide support to an entity adversely affected by restrictions imposed by a state or territory to control COVID-19, so in response to what are most commonly known as lockdowns. This measure will give effect to the government's commitment to assist any state that is unable to administer its own business support payments in the event of a significant lockdown imposed by a state or territory, backdated to 1 July this year and in effect until 31 December 2022. This amendment ensures that the government has the flexibility it needs to provide timely and efficient support to businesses across Australia in cases where they have been impacted by public health orders related to the control of COVID-19.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 to the bill amends the Taxation Administration Act 1953 to allow the Australian Tax Office to share data with government agencies for the purpose of administering a relevant COVID-19 business support program. Relevant business support programs are those that have been included in a declaration via the Treasurer for this purpose. The Treasury can make this declaration by legislative instrument if he is satisfied that the program responds to the economic impacts of COVID-19 and supports businesses that have had their operations impacted by public health orders. This schedule will assist with the timely and efficient delivery of business support payments to businesses across Australia that are impacted by COVID-19 and have had their operations impacted by public health directive.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 to the bill introduces a new legislative instrument making a power in the income tax laws to make eligible Commonwealth COVID-19 business grants free from income tax, and I'm sure that there will be many grant recipients who will be happy to hear that. This treatment will ensure eligible business support payments are able to provide the greatest possible benefit by classifying them as non-assessable non-exempt income for tax purposes. Currently states and territories are able to apply for the same tax treatment where they have grant programs focusing on supporting small and medium businesses facing exceptional circumstances related to COVID-19. This measure builds on the government's broader support to businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Schedule 4 is for a modification power which will reinstate a power to allow responsible ministers to change arrangements complying with information and documentary requirements under Commonwealth legislation in response to ongoing challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. This measure is temporary and will be repealed on 31 December 2022. Schedule 5 is for tax exemptions for COVID-19 disaster payments. These are incredibly important measures to ensure that we continue to have success in keeping businesses afloat during the worst impacts of COVID-19 and that our economic recovery continues to lead the world.</para>
<para>Australia is certainly not out of the woods when it comes to the COVID-19 pandemic. I know that is incredibly difficult for some Australians to understand, particularly those people in Victoria and, to an extent, in NSW as well, who have had their lives go into and out of lockdown. Coming from Tasmania, where this hasn't been as much of an issue for us, I can't even begin to imagine the impact that that must be having on businesses and employees to an extent—you don't necessarily know if or when you're going to be able to go to work. You are at the mercy of this awful virus, but this government is with you. We are supporting small businesses in Australia to deal with this economic crisis. On that note, I commend the bill to the Senate.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SHELDON</name>
    <name.id>168275</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021. Here in Sydney we're entering our sixth week of lockdown, with no end in sight. In the last week we've been joined by those living in South-East Queensland. In Victoria and South Australia restrictions have only recently been lifted. There are more than 10 million Australians currently enduring a lockdown. People are doing it tough, particularly here in south-west Sydney but also around Australia.</para>
<para>The most direct consequence of the COVID-19 outbreak is the impact on mental and physical health. Currently there are 286 people hospitalised with COVID here in New South Wales and 53 of those people are in intensive care. Tragically, there have been 17 deaths in this current outbreak. This outbreak and the subsequent lockdowns are taking a heavy mental-health toll. At a time when loneliness, isolation and alienation are already widely felt across the community, these lockdowns are exceptionally difficult.</para>
<para>Then there is the economic toll this outbreak is taking. These lockdowns are costing the Australian economy $300 million a day. When the number is that massive it can feel very abstract. It's the collective loss of tens of thousands of small businesses. That's what it means. Many of them have been forced to shut-up shop. It is the collective loss for millions of Australian workers of their jobs or at least their shifts. For weeks, millions of Australian workers and their families have faced an uncertain future. The country simply did not know what support would be available from the federal government in this time of great need.</para>
<para>This outbreak did not come out of the blue. These lockdowns are not unprecedented. There was no need for this mad scramble to announce a series of ad hoc support packages. It has created unnecessary confusion about what help is available and who is eligible to receive it.</para>
<para>When Australia was first plunged into lockdown last year, Labor and the trade union movement called for wage subsidies. The Morrison government opposed it initially. They were eventually dragged kicking and screaming to set up JobKeeper. JobKeeper is deeply flawed, but it's also a critically important scheme. The Morrison government chose to exclude casuals who had been with their employer for more than a year from JobKeeper. In March, when the Morrison government decided to kill JobKeeper, Labor called for that architecture to be kept in place for those who needed it. But the Prime Minister was living in his own fantasy world at that point. He was saying that the vaccine rollout wasn't a race. He was playing down the urgency of the vaccine rollout while, at the same time, dismantling the economic support that had been developed in case of further lockdowns. If you aren't going to take the vaccine rollout seriously, you need to keep the contingency measures in place. It's that simple.</para>
<para>This brings us back to the real reason that 10 million Australians are in lockdown today, which is that the Prime Minister failed in the only two jobs he had this year: he failed to lead a speedy and effective vaccine rollout, and he failed to set up a national quarantine system. We are almost last among all developed nations for vaccination rates. It's a horrific situation we're now finding ourselves in. This is 18 months into the pandemic, and we're still relying on hotels to act as emergency quarantine facilities. Since November, there's been a leak from hotel quarantine, on average, every nine days. The Prime Minister's failures on vaccines and quarantine are the reason we are in this horrible situation.</para>
<para>But those aren't the only failures of the Morrison government this year. The aviation sector has been particularly badly hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. When JobKeeper was killed in March, the aviation sector was very clear about the need for continued wage subsidies. At the March hearings of the inquiry into the future of Australian aviation post COVID-19, workers from all corners of the aviation industry were calling for continued wage subsidies not just to keep food on the table but also to keep workers connected to their industry and to their companies and to ensure that, once the sector does get back on its feet, we have a trained and ready workforce to stand back up.</para>
<para>Ms Cory Flynn, an airline worker and Australian Services Union delegate, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Having JobKeeper or knowing that we did have some source of income coming to us, was a relief … I can't stress enough how important it is for our industry to have JobKeeper there until our industry can get back on its feet.</para></quote>
<para>This is a direct quote from an aviation worker, and a number of other aviation workers have spoken out very clearly on this matter. A flight attendant from the Flight Attendants Association of Australia was quoted in evidence as saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Without this support, I would have to have moved back to South Australia and possibly be split from my husband whilst I am pregnant with our first child.</para></quote>
<para>These are direct quotes about the importance of a continued wage subsidy and the importance of keeping aviation workers connected with their employer.</para>
<para>What did the Morrison government do? There was no wage subsidy. They instead set up a pork-barrelling scheme to provide subsidised airfares to marginal seats. The pork-barrelling was so blatant the government had to tack on new destinations the week after it was announced, and we still don't know how the destinations were chosen. I have asked Austrade and the department of transport at the last two rounds of estimates, and no-one can tell me. Austrade pointed me to a few datasets. When we analysed them, it turned out that none of it matched with the actual destinations the government selected. It's just the latest in a long series of rorts and lack of transparency by the Morrison government, and this one is particularly disgusting because it came at the expense of those aviation workers who are left behind.</para>
<para>Just this week, the Deputy Prime Minister got up and announced a new wage subsidy, five long months after aviation workers had told us that they desperately need support. It took five months for the government to react, and the package they announced was only for pilots and cabin crew. There is nothing in that package for thousands of ground staff doing it tough around Australia. This is the problem with the Morrison government's policy on the run: people get left behind. In this case, those ground staff have been left behind intentionally.</para>
<para>But Labor do support this bill today, and we have supported any support for workers and families doing it tough during this pandemic. We have not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. At every stage, Labor has put forward constructive policies and ideas for how we can support Australia through the crisis. Some, like JobKeeper, have been adopted by the government, albeit with added rorting and carve-outs. I strongly encourage the government to listen to Labor and the trade union movement again. There needs to be simple, clear and consistent financial support for workers who are losing jobs and income as a result of the pandemic.</para>
<para>Lastly, the Morrison government needs to take a serious look at what is happening with the vaccine rollout for aged-care workers. At the Senate Select Committee on Job Security last week three major aged-care providers told us they were going to struggle to meet the 17 September deadline for full vaccination.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>10000</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Senate will now move to senators' statements</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY SENATORS</title>
        <page.no>26</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY SENATORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Burnside, Mr Julian, AO, QC</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator VAN</name>
    <name.id>283601</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to condemn the utterly odorous statements made last week by Mr Julian Burnside where he compared the treatment of Palestinians to the German treatment of the Jews during the Second World War. This vile attempt to equate the people of Israel with modern history's most disgusting acts is atrocious and shows that voters made the right decision to reject him at the 2019 election. This is not the first time that the former Greens' candidate has made vile comments equating people to Nazis. Indeed, in 2018 he shared doctored images of Minister Dutton superimposed with a Nazi officer's uniform. It seems as though, even after the backlash of that incident, he has not learned his lesson or sought to educate himself on the matter.</para>
<para>I suggest that Mr Burnside stops using the Holocaust whenever he has criticism of Israel or their policies, especially as, by his own admission, he is yet to even visit Israel and experience, look at and learn about the situation on the ground. His lack of understanding of this issue is clear. It's unfathomable that he would still make these comments before educating himself.</para>
<para>I was last in Israel in December 2019. I learnt so much from my time on the ground there. What you learn from being there goes to explain a lot of what happens on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides. I suggest Mr Burnside follow suit and visit the region, meet the people and educate himself to see why such comments leave such a vile taste in one's mouth. These comments not only destroy the promise he made previously to Holocaust survivors after his previous disgraceful tweets but also unnecessarily open old wounds that many people suffer from and throw dirt in their face.</para>
<para>This type of rhetoric and language is utterly disgraceful and serves only one purpose—promoting anti-Semitic hatred, which we are working very hard to stamp out. If we are to remember the atrocities that occurred during the Holocaust so that they never happen again and properly pay our respect to all those who suffered at the hands of the Nazi party, we as a nation must be very clear that this behaviour is unacceptable and that we will not stand by and let this sickening behaviour go unchecked. If we do so, we run the risk of seeing history repeat itself. To hear these words from a man who came close to standing in parliament last year with the Greens is unconscionable. Such rhetoric only poisons the public debate. The Greens should immediately take steps to remove him from the party.</para>
<para>When Mr Burnside met with Holocaust survivor Moshe Fiszman a couple of years ago he said that he would never make comments like this again, yet just last month he did so once more. I want to make my position known to this chamber and the people of Australia: anti-Semitism has no place in Australia, and I'll do everything in my power to ensure it is stamped out. As I have said many times in this chamber, Australia has no place for racism, and anti-Semitism is just another form of racism.</para>
<para>My concern is that the misuse of such events to portray one's own misguided views bites at the foundations of democracy and liberty of a country we all call home. Mr Burnside's contempt for decency clearly shows that he should hand back his AO and that he does not deserve his QC title.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Research Council</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator KIM CARR</name>
    <name.id>AW5</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government's favourite newspaper, the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>, advised us on 30 July that the Minister for Education and Youth, Mr Tudge, is worried about threats to free speech on Australia's university campuses. This time his ire was raised by the ANU Students Association, which allegedly stopped the ADF and an anti-abortion group from setting up stalls for the association's market day. Now, the facts are hazy. The ANU student newspaper <inline font-style="italic">Woroni</inline> reported that the group had been excluded, but the students association says that these organisations hadn't applied and therefore weren't excluded.</para>
<para>However, this lack of clarity did not worry the minister. He has threatened to cut funding from student organisations that try to suppress the expression of opinions they do not share. Mr Tudge acknowledges this may be difficult, because, if a student union is a legal entity separate from the university, it's not covered by the free speech definitions added to the Higher Education Support Act earlier this year. Nor can conditions be placed on direct grants, because student unions don't receive them. The Commonwealth does lend money to students to pay their amenities fees, and the government could consider legislation to attach conditions to these loans. If the minister goes that far, it will be because the government has resolved to invent what the review by former Chief Justice Robert French could not find—that is, a free speech crisis on Australian campuses.</para>
<para>This obsession with a confected crisis is a complete contradiction to a genuine threat to academic freedom that is of the government's own making. The Australian Research Council, which assesses the merits of application for research grants, has been co-opted into a smear campaign that questions the integrity and the loyalty of reputable academics. Now, some people believe that McCarthyism—that is, the casting of doubt without evidence on the loyalties of people in public life—was dead and buried in the last Cold War. Well may we wish that was so, but this label fits the way Australia's most important research funding institution has been browbeaten into putting supposed national security concerns ahead of academic excellence.</para>
<para>In the last round of Senate estimates, the Australian Research Council's CEO, Professor Sue Thomas, admitted that the Australian Research Council collects information on what she calls 'sensitivities', which could be added to the personal records of grant applicants. So, the ARC is now keeping dossiers on what they perceive to be the political views of applicants. Now, sources within the Australian Research Council rightfully describe these as the 'sensitivity files'. It's not only advice from the security agencies, but also scans of media reports and data from the dubious China Defence Universities Tracker, maintained by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute—ASPI. In other words, a slanderous newspaper article and a software program run by ASPI—which itself has a disclaimer on the use of that tracker that warns it should not be taken as evidence of wrongdoing—can now be used to sway the judgement of the minister for education when authorising grant applications.</para>
<para>This process led to 18 applications being withheld for approval in the October 2020 round of research grants pending security agency advice. Ultimately, 13 of these grants were approved, but five applicants were vetoed without explanation by the then education minister, Mr Tehan, on his way out the door of his last day in office in that portfolio. Answers to questions on notice indicate that the announcement of the veto was made, as I said, on the final afternoon of the minister's tenure in that office. Mr Tehan has set a new benchmark for mopping up loose ends. How has it come to this? Hunting spies and traitors is not the Australian Research Council's job, and its willingness to dabble in that role can only contribute further to the baseless smearing of distinguished academics, many with global reputations, that has become such a repellent feature of recent news reporting.</para>
<para>On 24 August 2020 the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> published the names of more than 30 researchers who were supposedly complicit in the economic espionage—I think those were the exact words they used—of this country. There was no substance to that allegation. In an answer to a question on notice the Australian Research Council has confirmed, 'All 31 allegations relating to researchers named on an ARC grant have now been resolved.' In other words, no breaches of national security were found.</para>
<para>In the same answer the Australian Research Council stated, 'Three issues relating to two researchers were identified and action taken.' This answer didn't explain what those issues were, but Professor Thomas's admission that the ARC maintains sensitivity files came after she answered no to a question that I routinely ask at Senate estimates: has any Australian university breached the Defence Trade Controls Act? If you think about the number of applications for support for travel made within this parliament, by members of parliament, which have required resolution, there would be considerably more than the number of issues raised through the Australian Research Council. The Australian Research Council's answer to the question was no, confirming that the strict procedures laid down in the Defence Trade Controls Act are working. Under the act, universities work closely with the Department of Defence to prevent the sharing of information with international collaborators if that work poses a risk to our national security. But you won't read about that in the newspapers, nor will a correction of these baseless smears be found in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>.</para>
<para>Despite these rigorous processes, those intent on inciting this new cold war continue to argue as if all collaborations are dangerous. This has led to the creation of ASPI's dodgy tracker and a spate of media reports that vilify prominent academics without providing a shred of evidence that they have engaged in anything that could be described as espionage, let alone treason. I remind the chamber that this is despite the fact that collaboration with international agencies is government policy.</para>
<para>All this has suited the agenda of sections of the government, which throughout its tenure in office has engaged in the undermining of Australia's higher education system. The coalition's attitude has been expressed not only through the funding cuts and bias about different types of research—which it says don't turn a quick dollar—but also through its campaigns against a confected free speech crisis that it has developed on various campuses. Nothing could be more likely to inhibit academic freedom and free speech than the knowledge that the principal research-funding body is collecting personal information on academics that a minister might use to support the rejection of a grant application. This is information that cannot be subject to refutation by the applicant, to due process or to procedural fairness.</para>
<para>This is the type of fearmongering attitude that prevailed in the heyday of McCarthyism in the United States in the 1950s. The ARC risks damaging its own reputation by becoming complicit in the scaremongering of the new cold war warriors. It's supposed to be a non-partisan body that makes recommendations on the academic excellence of research projects. Its attitudes and behaviour are not compatible with compiling so-called 'sensitivity dossiers' on some of our leading academics operating in Australia at the moment.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Law Enforcement</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator THORPE</name>
    <name.id>280304</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I rise today to make a very important statement on something that I didn't think I would need to spell out and highlight to the parliament of this country in 2021. But here we are. Children do best when they are in loving and caring environments and have access to great health care, education and community sport. But in the 'Land of Oz' that's not afforded to everybody, especially those aged from 10. Children as young as 10 are being thrown into jail in Australia for low-level offences like stealing a chocolate bar, or having a bite of the friend's chocolate bar. Having such a low age of legal responsibility is impacting First Nations children the most. Separating children from their families, their communities, their education and, for First Nations children, their culture and connection is causing lasting damage to our youngest.</para>
<para>Our young people are our future, right? But this government, this country, locks our young people up and makes them more likely to get trapped in the quicksand of the criminal legal system before they have reached their teenage years. Research shows that, when someone enters the 'quicksand' of the criminal legal system, the system makes it incredibly difficult to escape. Children belong in schools and playgrounds, connected to their families, communities and culture, not placed in handcuffs, held in watch houses and locked away in prisons.</para>
<para>In just one year across this country, close to 600 children aged 10 to 13 years were locked up and thousands more were hauled through the criminal legal system. Really? These are children that we are keeping in jails in this country. Some of these children still have baby teeth. Where's their tooth fairy? Is it the prison guard? It's absolutely disgusting! It's disgusting that we have people in this place and in the Victorian government who continue to lock up babies who still have baby teeth. To all parents in this chamber: what if this was your child? Think about that. There's been a chorus of calls both nationally and internationally—from First Nations organisations and advocates, expert United Nations bodies, human rights organisations, medical and legal bodies, and academics—for this country to raise the minimum age of legal responsibility.</para>
<para>You talk about medical science and COVID and you come up with all the evidence around coal-fired power stations and how great they are. But you decide what evidence you choose. In this case, you don't care that 10-year-old children with baby teeth are being incarcerated at the rate they are in this country. Children need to be loved and supported so they can reach their full potential, not locked up. It is just over a year since a meeting of Attorneys-General decided to do something about our low age of legal responsibility. They talked and talked, but what did they do? They scrapped it. They took it off the priority list. This do-nothing Morrison government recently defied calls from 31 United Nations member states to raise the age. Shame on this country. Shame on the Morrison government. Imagine being the government that was happy to let children as young as 10—children who are nowhere near developing, so much so that they still have baby teeth—go to jail. They are just cowards. Are they cowards? What is this? What kind of people do this in this country?</para>
<para>I'm proud to be in a party that as a matter of urgency is committed to raising the age of legal responsibility from 10 to 14. It would see so many children released back to their families and communities and into programs that make them the people they want to be. Raising the age of legal responsibility has been identified as an area of urgent reform to ensure the physical and psychological health of children, their families and their communities. Instead of jailing children for minor crimes, we would support children to get back on the right path through culturally safe and supportive diversionary programs, as well as supportive bail and community corrections programs to divert people away from prisons. No matter who we are, the legal system needs to protect all of us equally. Our legal system fails too many people.</para>
<para>How was the legal system invented in the first place? It is based on colonisation, patriarchy and locking them all up, especially the black ones. It fails First Nations people regularly, and the consequences can be a matter of life or death, and we know that because of deaths in custody. Everyone doesn't want to talk about that big elephant in the room. The system is too expensive and too hard to access, and often it's simply racist. Children as young as 10 can be imprisoned, and overwhelmingly we know that they are First Nations kids. We know that they are black kids. Who cares about them in this country? On the 30th anniversary of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, this government is pushing back on working with First Nations families and activists who've had a loved one die in custody to implement all of the outstanding recommendations. We know the rhetoric that the government throws out on that. We don't buy it. It's not working. Implement them all.</para>
<para>Millions of Australians are locked down, locked into poverty and locked out of an affordable home because of the do-nothing Morrison government, and our people are dying on their watch. You have blood on your hands, Morrison. The government don't care about us or you. They don't care about anyone but themselves. They're so privileged and colonised that they wouldn't know what it's like to have to struggle to put food on the table.</para>
<para>In my home state of Victoria, Premier Andrews has also presided over a cruel criminal legal system that again punishes blackfellas instead of protecting them. On the 30th anniversary of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, the Andrews Labor government declared:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… too many Aboriginal Victorians are still dying in custody. Too many Aboriginal Victorians are in custody in the first place.</para></quote>
<para>Yet the Andrews government, like the Morrison government, is hardly a helpless bystander. This was an entirely predictable tragedy. The Andrews Labor government is also the main contributor to this ongoing crisis. The royal commission recommended:</para>
<quote><para class="block">91. That governments, in conjunction with Aboriginal Legal Services and Police Services, give consideration to amending bail legislation:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">…   …   …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">b. to revise any criteria which inappropriately restrict the granting of bail to Aboriginal people …</para></quote>
<para>The Andrews Labor government is doing the complete opposite. The Andrews bail laws are inappropriately restricting the granting of bail to First Nations people in Victoria. The Andrews government bail laws ensure that imprisonment is not used as a sanction of last resort. As a result, from 2010 to 2020 the imprisonment of women rose by 174 per cent, compared to an 81 per cent increase in the male population, and more than half the women now in prison have not been sentenced. Think of that for a moment: half of the women, our women, imprisoned in Victoria have not been sentenced for a crime. They don't have their babies with them either. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>30484</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind all senators to address those from the other place by their correct titles.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: State and Territory Border Closures</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DAVEY</name>
    <name.id>281697</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today with a massive sense of frustration. Throughout COVID, hundreds of families across regional and remote Australia commence each school term with a great sense of trepidation, not knowing whether the child they are sending off to boarding school or university will be caught on the wrong side of a border due to a sudden state lockdown. It was 12 months ago that I rose in this chamber to tell the story of Barney and Charlie Mort, who'd been caught up in just such a lockdown in Victoria, with their parents 1,000 kilometres away north-west of Bourke. Through negotiation with the state agencies, we managed to get Barney and Charlie home via a commonsense route—a direct route with a COVID-safe plan that enabled them to drive from their school to their home, avoiding all COVID hotspots, wearing a mask and stopping only at set locations for fuel, and they got home safely. Unfortunately, we are still hearing stories of children getting caught up in lockdowns every term, every time there's a new lockdown. We have not learnt from the past experiences.</para>
<para>In mid-July, students in Victoria returned to school for the start of term. Many travelled from remote parts of New South Wales. Less than one week later, that state went into a lockdown. Some of those children were able to return home; others weren't. The schools did everything they could to support the students. Students who had to remain in Victoria were supported by the schools, and I congratulate and thank the schools for that. One of the students caught up, again, was my friend Charlie Mort, and this time it's done him. Charlie, while being supported by the school, is going to see out the remainder of the term, but he's decided he cannot take the risk again. He is not going to return to school.</para>
<para>Why are we doing this to our students? Why are we doing this to our younger generation? Year 12 students in Victoria have not attended a full term of school since they started their final two years. I appreciate we are doing all we can to keep our community safe, but we really need to think seriously about what we're doing to our younger generations and to our regional, rural and remote students, who don't get a choice. I'm talking about students who, if they were to attend their closest state school, are looking at over an hour of travel on unsealed roads, one way. It is unfeasible for those students to attend a state school. Boarding is their only realistic option. This is not limited to the border between New South Wales and Victoria. We have the same issue in Queensland, although I commend the Queensland government for currently having a border bubble that does allow students, and their parents, who live in close proximity to the border to cross over for educational and support purposes. But, outside the bubble, if those students are to return home they have to isolate.</para>
<para>As I said, I've been raising this for 12 months. I wrote to the Prime Minister in January, warning that the issue remained unresolved as we were entering the 2021 school year. I wrote to the Prime Minister again just last month. National cabinet needs to come together and seriously look at this issue. Each term, as these parents are sending their children across a state border, it seems like we're starting from scratch. We haven't learnt from previous lockdowns. We haven't looked at what worked. We haven't looked at the commonsense approach that we used for Barney and Charlie last year with the COVID-safe travel plan to get students home and ease the minds of parents and children alike. The mental health issues from the impact this is having on our students is immeasurable. I'm getting reports from parents of daily and weekly phone calls from their children expressing concern because of the uncertainty. The Isolated Children's Parents Association have done a lot of work in this area. In November last year they provided a comprehensive submission to the government, with the hope that it would be implemented for January.</para>
<para>We have been calling for consistency from national cabinet on a number of issues. National cabinet very early in the piece agreed to a national freight initiative to apply a consistent mechanism for our freight transport companies to be able to cross borders, even when there's a lockdown. That has worked. It took a lot longer, about six months longer, but finally national cabinet agreed on a set of rules to allow agricultural workers also to cross borders. Despite some confusion shortly after, it was implemented with another lockdown towards the end of last year. It seems to be working, which is great. It shows that when we have agreement, when we decide on a consistent approach, when the rules are clear and when people know how to apply for an exemption and what rules they must follow to get an exemption the rules work. Unfortunately, despite calls from the Isolated Children's Parents Association, from the Australian Boarding Schools Association and from others, we have no such approach to boarding school students. Each term, students going from south-western New South Wales into South Australia need to review the rules. Often they need to reapply for another exemption. Often they're told they're not going to get an exemption, that they have to go into isolation. In Victoria the rules change weekly. We've had a border bubble between New South Wales and Victoria. The boundaries of that bubble have recently been adjusted. The reasons for travel within the bubble during a period of lockdown have also changed, as recently as last night. There is no consistency in our rules. I understand the angst that our families have when they're trying to work out what is best. They all want the best education opportunities for their children, but they all want their children to be safe and well, mentally as well as physically.</para>
<para>We can now see that until there is a sufficient level of vaccination and confidence in the community the states will continue to rely on lockdowns as a mechanism to manage the virus in the community. That is their right, but in the meantime, our rural, regional and remote students should not have to suffer additional burdens when there are commonsense approaches that we can use. We are not talking about sending students from hotspot to hotspot. We are talking about students who are actually happy to isolate on their home farms—most of these students are farm kids. Most of the families are happy to comply with any COVID-safe travel plans that are put in place. So I implore national cabinet to sit down and develop a consistent set of rules that can apply to interstate students, be they boarding school students or university students, because this impacts them across the board.</para>
<para>I had a suggestion about national cabinet sent to me by email from a constituent. In the email, this constituent said: 'After each national cabinet, the Prime Minister comes out and extols about how well it's working, how robust discussions happen but consensus decisions are made. But then, within hours, if not minutes, state premiers return to sniping backhanded comments to each other, create negative media stories and create their own rules.' This is the problem that must be resolved.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Charitable Organisations</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BILYK</name>
    <name.id>HZB</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Charities and not-for-profits play an important role in our democracy. As organisations that exist solely for the purpose of contributing to the public good, they work at the coalface of many important causes, such as welfare, human rights, overseas development assistance and the environment. The expertise they gain through this work makes an important contribution to the public debate, and, from this contribution, we get better policy outcomes. Some of the most important social reforms in Australia that are now widely embraced and accepted, such as the NDIS, Medicare and marriage equality, were advocated by charities. Many organisations from the sector and hundreds of my Tasmanian constituents have contacted me to express concern that this important role is now under threat from new regulation.</para>
<para>In a case of extreme legislative overreach, the Morrison government has introduced a new regulation which charities say could have a chilling effect on free speech. This regulation will come into effect if it is not disallowed by the Senate. It has been introduced under the guise of cracking down on charities that break the law. Now, Labor agrees that charities and not-for-profits that break the law should be deregistered. In fact, that's what the current regulations allow. But the government's new regulation goes a lot further than that. The changes target charities which engage in public events such as protests or visuals at which minor or summary offences could occur. This could be something as simple as blocking a footpath or failing to shut a gate to private property. The mere act of promoting an event at which a summary offence is committed by just one person could result in deregistration. The charities commissioner can even deregister a charity simply because he anticipates a summary offence might be committed. He can anticipate what somebody is going to do! Charities are going to be bogged down in red tape, trying to comply with the new regulation, and diverting valuable resources to seeking legal advice that should be going towards important causes that they were established to promote.</para>
<para>Under the existing regulations, which already capture charities that are breaking the law, only two—that's right, two—of Australia's 59,000 registered charities have lost their registration for unacceptable activist activity. There is no charity crime wave gripping the nation, as the government would have you believe, and there's no need for this authoritarian regulation. The charities commissioner already admitted in Senate estimates that there is no evidence—no evidence—to support the claim that criminals masquerading as activists is a widespread phenomenon.</para>
<para>This proposed regulation could have a chilling effect on democracy and on free speech. The proposal has already been criticised by a wide range of charities, including welfare organisations and faith groups. The peak community sector body, ACOSS, described it as an extreme overreach and an attack on our democracy.</para>
<para>So it appears that our Prime Minister, who praises the quiet Australians, would prefer charities to be not just quiet but silent. The Liberals want Australian charities to just do the hard, hands-on work in the community, not engage in activism or public debate. This government wants charities planting trees and running soup kitchens but not campaigning for action on climate change or trying to fight structural inequality. In the Liberal world view, charities have no place in public debate. Like naughty children, they should be seen but not heard.</para>
<para>I worry about the enforcement of this regulation under any charities commission, but it's even more worrisome with the current commissioner, given his outdated views on so many issues. Mr Johns has said that poor women were being used as cash cows, that Australia is sucking in too many of the wrong type of immigrant and that there is a great deal of impure altruism in the charity sector. It's bad enough giving anyone such extraordinary and far-reaching powers without putting them in the hands of someone as irresponsible in his public statements as Mr Johns.</para>
<para>This regulation is the kind of attack we've come to expect from a government that is at war with charities. They declared that war in 2014, less than a year after coming to power, with attempts to scrap the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. When they failed to pass that legislation to shut down the ACNC, they appointed a commissioner who had a history of openly criticising charities, an appointment that was described by some as bizarre. The new government regulation is one of many attempts to silence the sector and to stop it from legitimately participating in public debate. This government has put gag clauses in social services agreements with charities. They've attempted to shut down the ability of charities to advocate, and they tried to extend to charities the ban on foreign donations to political parties. For years they have dragged their feet on harmonising charity fundraising laws, continuing to allow charities to be tied up in the red tape of complying with the myriad of conflicting and outdated laws.</para>
<para>Charities have been established to promote social, economic and environmental good. When they participate in public debate, they do so on behalf of the poorest, most disadvantaged, most vulnerable people in our society, those who usually don't have the power, the wealth and the connections to fight for themselves. Charities give a voice to the voiceless. So, when charities suffer, people suffer too. That's why the government's war on charities must end. Australia needs a government that's on the side of the Australian charities, not one that is working against them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON</name>
    <name.id>BK6</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I rise to speak on the divisive and racist campaigns promoting the legislation of an Indigenous voice to parliament and the specific recognition of Indigenous people in the Australian Constitution. Our Constitution is a great achievement. It reflects the establishment of a great nation. The people of distant colonies gathered together in the 1890s and drafted a Constitution which has mostly served the nation very well over the past 120 years. This is remarkable because the architects of the Constitution could not foresee many of the events and developments that would shape Australia and change how it was governed. In the 1890s, travel between the colonies took days. Today it takes hours. Communication was mostly by letter, which also took days. For the majority of Australians at the time, sending a message over the telegraph was too expensive. In the 1890s, Indigenous Australians weren't recognised as citizens. They didn't participate in the constitutional conventions and they weren't eligible to vote in the referenda held by each colony to approve the Constitution.</para>
<para>In 1967, of course, Australians voted strongly in favour in removing racist elements of the Constitution that were specifically about Indigenous people. This historic referendum meant removing the reference to the Aboriginal race in section 51 of the Constitution and altogether removing section 127 so that Indigenous Australians could be counted in the national census. As a result, the Constitution today is colour blind. Every Australian adult is equal under the Constitution regardless of their race. That's the way it should be. Equality before the law is one of the most important foundations of a democracy. Without it, there is no democracy. One adult, one vote—it's the only way that's free and fair. There have been 44 referenda held to change our Constitution, and the 1967 referendum is the most well-known. It was a catalyst for many changes in how Australia treated Aborigines, and it was also remarkable for the 90 per cent vote in favour of change, because few referenda are ever passed.</para>
<para>The campaigns for specific Indigenous recognition in our Constitution threaten to undo this tremendous achievement. They place at risk the positive steps taken towards reconciliation since that historic moment. They seek to make our Constitution a racist document once more by again singling out a specific race of people to be treated differently from other Australians. That isn't progress; it's regression. Noel Pearson says constitutional recognition is needed because he believes that Australia does not recognise its Indigenous peoples. That simply isn't true. Flags representing Indigenous Australians are flown everywhere. It seems you can't even start a meeting in Australia without formally acknowledging Indigenous people, and you can't hold an event without paying for a welcome to country ceremony. Our children learn about Indigenous Australia in school, even learning to speak Indigenous languages. They're also being taught critical race theory, so they feel guilt and shame for being white. Canberra, the nation's capital, gets its name from an Indigenous word. Many other places in Australia do too. Some iconic locations have even had their names changed to Indigenous words; we don't call it Ayers Rock anymore, and we're not allowed to climb it anymore. Our anthem was also recently changed in recognition of an Indigenous sensitivity.</para>
<para>We have ministers and whole government departments dedicated to Aboriginal affairs. Buckets of taxpayer moneys are spent directly on Indigenous people. Government spending is round $44,000 per Indigenous Australian, while it's only around $24,000 per non-Indigenous Australian. We even have the Closing the gap report delivered by the Prime Minister each year to report on Indigenous progress against national benchmarks or, more accurately, the lack of progress despite the many billions of dollars thrown at the issue. To suggest Australia doesn't already recognise its Indigenous people is ridiculous. In fact, the Constitution itself already recognises Indigenous people without referring to them specifically. The Constitution has many references to the people and electors. Today that means every voting adult in Australia, Indigenous or otherwise. The question which everyone is avoiding is this: who will be eligible to vote for delegates in the proposed voice? Since 1971 the number of people identifying as Indigenous in the national census has risen from approximately 116,000 to 800,000. That's an increase of 590 per cent. Is that how Indigenous eligibly will be decided, by people ticking a box in a survey? Let me enlighten a lot of people about the working definition of 'an Indigenous person' used by Australian governments. 'Aboriginal' means a person who is a member of the Aboriginal race of Australia, identifies as an Aboriginal and is accepted by the Aboriginal community as an Aboriginal. If this is the working definition, it's no wonder so many more people are identifying as Indigenous to claim the benefit this government provides exclusively to Indigenous people. How will eligibility be defined and nepotism stopped in its tracks for electing the voice?</para>
<para>We must also remember that elected representation exclusively for Aboriginal people has been tried before. In my first speech in this building 25 years ago I highlighted the failures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission and called for it to be abolished. ATSIC was dysfunctional, corrupt and rife with the nepotism and the lack of accountability which still plagues the Aboriginal industry today. It took another eight long unproductive years for the coalition government to realise these failures and abolish ATSIC with bipartisan support. To this day I'm hearing from the true Indigenous people who are crying out for the industry to be audited and held accountable for the billions of dollars it has wasted with no real tangible benefits to them or improvements to the conditions in which they live. If a voice to parliament is placed in our Constitution, Australians won't have the option to abolish it, as was done with ATSIC. It's no wonder the unaccountable Aboriginal industry is campaigning for it, but some feedback from the consultation process suggests many are sceptical that recognition or a voice to parliament will do anything to make a practical difference in their lives. Many of us want policies which deliver practical outcomes that make a positive difference for Aborigines, not more of the same failures and not more of the same useless symbolism. That's where the focus of this parliament should be.</para>
<para>Those politicians in this place campaigning for a constitutional voice to parliament for Indigenous people seem to forget that there are already 227 voices representing indigenous people in this parliament, let alone those who identify as Aboriginal, including one who is the Minister for Indigenous Australians. If you think more representation in parliament is needed for Indigenous people, then you haven't been doing your job representing them. You're not listening to Indigenous people or, for that matter, the rest of your constituents. They're becoming fatigued by a reconciliation progress with no real progress and no end in sight. They're tired of being unfairly shamed as racist colonists and colonial occupiers. They're becoming cynical of an Aboriginal industry only interested in money, power, division and fostering a culture of perpetual victimhood. They understand that what Indigenous people need is empowerment, not as a race but as individuals, to address their own disadvantage. This means education and opportunities which enable them to fully participate in the national economy and in Australian society. Where taxpayer support is needed to help make this happen, it should be provided based on an individual's need and not on their skin colour. It's the dream of Martin Luther King Jr that people will be judged on the content of their character, not the colour of their skin.</para>
<para>Finally, a note of warning: if we recognise prior Indigenous ownership in the Constitution and then one day become a republic, the High Court could be forced to rule the Crown's former sovereignty over Australia only belongs to Indigenous people as native title holders, rather than every Australian. With 32 per cent of Australia already under native title, is that the outcome we really want? No. Australia belongs to every Australian. Indigenous people, the early convicts and settlers and the many migrants who came here from all over the world have all contributed to the success story of Australia. Australia belongs to all of us. As that great Australian export Paul Hogan said in <inline font-style="italic">Crocodile Dundee</inline>:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… Aborigines don't own the land. They belong to it. It's like their mother. See those rocks? Been standing there for 600 million years. Still be there when you and I are gone. So arguing over who owns them is like two fleas arguing over who owns the dog they live on.</para></quote>
<para>It's our nation together. That's what One Nation stands for.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McMAHON</name>
    <name.id>282728</name.id>
    <electorate>Northern Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to discuss the enormous potential of the Beetaloo Basin in the Northern Territory. There is growing frustration amongst those of us who take a more reasoned approach to debate around resource development and combatting climate change through sensible, rather than hysterical, debate. For years now, the doomsday soothsayers have talked about the world ending. They have talked about the single greatest crisis facing humanity. They have told those of us who disagree with them and don't fall into line that we are all going to hell in a handbasket. They have told us that if we dare challenge their thinking then we are a denialist; that we are not worthy thinkers. I find that to be so condescending from a group of people who also champion free speech. I guess it is free speech as long as the speech is in agreement with those views.</para>
<para>Today, the front page of the <inline font-style="italic">NT News</inline> was headlined 'Battery investment' and, further inside, 'Half a mil to supercharge NT battery manufacturing'. It stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Northern Territory government has announced a $500,000 grant to turbocharge investment in battery research and manufacturing.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Territory's plentiful natural resources are also expected to become attractive to the growing battery sector, which is expected to play a crucial role in the globe's transition to renewable energy</para></quote>
<para>Do we see the irony of that statement? Transition to renewable energy is reliant on the NT's natural resources.</para>
<para>Given the current public debate about investing in fossil fuels, it occurs to me that this is a classic case of applying the <inline font-style="italic">Animal Farm</inline> mentality—that is, you support government spending money in areas as long as it fits with your resource development philosophy. The fossil fuel industry is not evil. It doesn't matter if we're talking about intermittent generators, oil and gas, coal or even nuclear; they all have a role to play in the future energy needs of the world and they have an even bigger role to play in the manufacturing sector, something the government is currently trying to turbocharge.</para>
<para>Here is the absolute irony of the opposition to fossil fuel development. You might be able to keep the lights on using renewable energy, but you won't be able to manufacture or supply a wide range of products that modern society depends upon. The lefties would have you believe that we can simply replace oil and gas with so-called renewables or intermittent generators. But we all know and understand that the use of intermittent generators requires firming—that is, a source of power to provide power when the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow. In my maiden speech, I indicated my support for a nuclear industry. I even spoke about this yesterday. I am even more resolute now. If we are to have a zero-emissions target forced onto us, then nuclear will have to be part of the mix. It cannot be avoided.</para>
<para>Here is a stark comparison of nuclear versus an intermittent generator such as solar. In the Northern Territory there has been a heap of talk around the Sun Cable project. Sun Cable is located in the Beetaloo basin area, which is known for its cattle as much as its gas. Sun Cable will occupy 12,000 hectares. At full capacity, under ideal conditions—that is, no dust and temperatures under 24 degrees and full sunshine—it will generate 14,000 megawatts. The plan is to sell the power to Singapore. We can compare this to the NuScale small modular nuclear reactor, which has been the first to receive US regulatory final safety evaluation. The NuScale reactor will produce 1,000 megawatts continuously, 24/7, on 18 hectares. Sun Cable will be 47 times the size of NuScale in land area to produce similar output if operating 24/7, which it would be lucky to do for about one-third of the time.</para>
<para>Many of those opposite, and all of the disarray in the corner, would have us use no fossil fuels for anything, ever—and you could say, if we have intermittent generators backed up by nuclear power, why would we need to? Again, the irony here is that intermittent generators, and even power stations themselves, are constructed with products of the oil and gas industry. These products are used for a very wide number of products that modern society simply could not do without—things like plastics, fibres, rubber, explosives, solvents and a whole range of industrial chemicals. Methane, ethane and propane are all products of the oil and gas industry and are available in the Beetaloo basin. Imagine, even in this chamber, if all these products suddenly disappeared. There would go the carpet. There would go the glasses that you're wearing on your head. There would go some people's clothes. Phones, tablets, computers, shoes—a whole range of products that we use and rely on would simply not exist. This is not to mention some very vital uses of these products such as in medicine, food production, agriculture and vet science. In medicine, everything from syringes to implants to highly complex life-saving machinery relies on products of the oil and gas industry. We simply could not do without this industry.</para>
<para>We may well be able to generate power from other sources—ironically, made from the oil and gas industry precursor products—but there is a whole range of things that we take for granted in our modern society that we simply wouldn't be able to do. How many lives would be lost? We talk about losing lives from COVID-19 and, yes, every single loss of life is a tragedy. How many more lives would be lost if we didn't have access to modern medicine products? Even something as simple as going and getting the so-called 'jab' for COVID-19 requires the use of a needle and a syringe, made from—you guessed it—products of the oil and gas industry. Every single time you go into hospital there are thousands of products used in procedures, used in preparation for procedures, used after procedures, for every single operation or intervention that's done on a person—thousands and thousands of products of the oil and gas industry. If we clicked our fingers tomorrow and wiped out those products then how many hundreds of thousands—millions—of people would die?</para>
<para>I would put it to you that there is not a single person in Australia and around most of the world who doesn't use products of the oil and gas industry, apart from power, in their lives almost every single day. So this is the great importance of the Beetaloo Basin. Sure, the Northern Territory has plenty of uranium. We can generate nuclear power for many thousands of years to come. But what we have is even more valuable in the capacity to produce the products that everyday Australians and in fact everyone around the world rely on for modern life. Unless we want to go back to living in a cave and belting animals over the heads with clubs, we need products of the oil and gas industry, and that is the true benefit of the Beetaloo Basin.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Vaccination</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WALSH</name>
    <name.id>252157</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Over the last few years of this Morrison government, we have seen time and again that it acts too little and too late. Now, Prime Minister Morrison wants Australians to make up for his lost time on the vaccine rollout and 'go for gold'. When it comes down to it, in almost everything that would benefit Australians, Mr Morrison makes sure that we are last out of the blocks. There are always excuses, there is always blame and there is always something that this government uses to justify its inaction, its complacency, its failures. In the case of the vaccine rollout, the government's inaction, complacency and failures have had devastating consequences.</para>
<para>If the vaccine rollout was a Liberal Party pet project in a marginal seat, you could bet your house on this government winning gold. There would be colour-coded spreadsheets. The Prime Minister would take charge. In fact, he would be the captain, the coach and the main player. The vaccines would be out the door as fast as a Liberal Party promise. They would be into people's arms as fast as a prime ministerial dash to a press conference. But the vaccine rollout is not a Liberal Party pet project; it's a national program that needs to be run to benefit all of us, with a plan, with energy, with commitment, with leadership. Without any of those things from this government, we are running last in the race, running last in the OECD and running something like 80th in the world. We are nowhere near the podium when it comes to the race to be vaccinated. We are not even close to qualifying for the main event.</para>
<para>Prime Minister Morrison has sought to spin the facts—that we were 'at the front of the queue', that it 'wasn't a race'. The truth is he didn't do his job when he needed to and now Australians have lost ground. We've lost the ground that we gained last year through so much hard work and so much sacrifice. We've lost the ground that we gained through the hard work of all Australians to lock down, to follow the rules and to stay safe. The Prime Minister has squandered our lead. He's squandered the advantage that we had with his failure to roll out the vaccine. We are coming last in the developed world, and Australians are paying the price today—Australians who last year did their job, Australians who are doing their job again under the incredible pressure of lockdowns and restrictions. They're staying home, they're getting tested and they're missing time with family and friends, and now, eight months into 2021, the Prime Minister finally does admit that it is a race. He finally wants to claim a gold medal and race us to the end of the year. Well, Prime Minister, I don't think there's going to be a gold medal waiting for you at the finish line.</para>
<para>Australians deserve so much better. They deserve a government that truly cares about keeping them safe and getting them through this pandemic. We should have had multiple vaccines secured and enough vaccines secured, because Prime Minister Morrison's incompetence led to a devastating overreliance on just one vaccine. We should have had purpose-built quarantine up and running, because Prime Minister Morrison's claim that hotel quarantine is 99.9 per cent effective has to be one of the biggest leaps in marketing history. And we should have had an objective and neutral response from the Prime Minister to lockdowns, because Prime Minister Morrison's refusal to accept going hard and going early on lockdowns and his determination to politicise state lockdowns is clearly costing us dearly now.</para>
<para>Australians have had to wait time and again for Prime Minister Morrison to backflip into doing the right thing, the right thing that Australians and Labor have called on him to do time and again, and that waiting has been disastrous—waiting on him to backflip into financial support for struggling workers and businesses, waiting on him to backflip into supporting short and sharp lockdowns to control the spread of the virus, waiting on him to backflip into picking up the phone and getting more Pfizer delivered into our country. Now we're waiting on him to perform his next backflip. We're waiting on him to backflip into supporting incentives to get more Australians rolling up their sleeves and getting the jab. The backflip? Now, that is an event where this Prime Minister would win a gold medal.</para>
<para>Why is the Prime Minister so incapable of hearing what is needed and acting in a timely and effective manner? Why does he insist on being dragged, kicking and screaming into any form of action? Why does he struggle so hard to admit his mistakes and learn from them? These are not the hallmarks of a real leader. They are the hallmarks of someone who just does not care, who does not care about the lives and livelihoods of the people he is supposed to stand up for, the people that he is supposed to fight for each and every single day.</para>
<para>Australians trusted that this government would keep them safe. Australians trusted that they would get a good supply of vaccines and have them ready by the start of this year. Australians trusted that this government wouldn't leave them like sitting ducks, waiting for the next outbreak of this virus. And this government failed. They failed. No matter how the Morrison government tries to spin it, they have failed to keep Australians safe, and that is their core responsibility. The Prime Minister says it's time to go for gold, but time and time again he has left Australians running last. Mr Morrison said Australia was at the front of the queue. What a load of spin! What a load of absolute spin!</para>
<para>Then, when he had to front up to say that we were, in fact, right at the back of the line, he decided to say that it was 'not a race'. Now he's trying to spin that statement and tell us that it was in the context of getting vaccines approved safely in this country. But the truth is that Prime Minister Morrison said it wasn't a race well after approvals for the vaccines had already been secured. The truth matters. It matters every single day. It certainly matters in a pandemic. But it doesn't seem to matter to this Prime Minister.</para>
<para>We all know far too well now that it always was a race, that it is a race today and that it's a race that Prime Minister Morrison has been losing for all of us, with Australians paying the price. Bad decision after bad decision has been made, interspersed with only non-decisions and complacency. The advice was to buy multiple vaccines, but it seems that the Prime Minister told Pfizer where to go, and they went. They went to the rest of the world with their vaccine. Instead, he put all the eggs into the AstraZeneca basket. He didn't spread the risk, he didn't plan, and Australians have been left behind the rest of the world. They have been left exposed to this new deadly strain of the virus. They have been left out in the cold again—locked down, quarantining, isolating and staying home, all because Prime Minister Morrison did not roll out the vaccine.</para>
<para>We have consistently ranked the worst in the world for the vaccine rollout. More than 80 countries are ahead of us today as the delta strain tries to spread itself across our country. Only 15 per cent of us are vaccinated. What an absolute disgrace! Scott Morrison has failed the vaccine rollout and failed to protect Australians against this highly infectious variant. After all of this, he now tells us, the Australian people, to 'go for gold' to make up for his lost time. What an absolute disgrace! 'I didn't do my job,' he says, 'but now you should get on board and get in the race.' That is his message for the Australian people. How he can think that his weak apology can make up for these astronomical failures is just beyond me. How he thinks he can say, 'Oops, my bad,' and expect Australians to move on from his stuff-ups is beyond me. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Grandparent Carers</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DEAN SMITH</name>
    <name.id>241710</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise this afternoon to talk about an issue in our community that has gone from being very, very invisible to being very, very visible. At the outset, I'd just like to congratulate this Australian Senate chamber and senators in this place and, indeed, members of parliament across the country who have consistently sought to draw greater attention to the very real issue of grandparents raising grandchildren in our community.</para>
<para>In particular, I would like to draw attention to what I think is a very important and critical report: <inline font-style="italic">A fairer future for grandchildren: understanding the impact of the caring role on grandparents raising their grandchildren</inline>. This report has been prepared by Wanslea Family Services in Western Australia, supported by Edith Cowan University in Western Australia and by Curtin University, again in Western Australia. I'm delighted to have been in the research advisory group for that meeting. I'll be the first one to admit that I didn't get the opportunity to attend every meeting, but they did know my very, very keen interest in drawing attention to this issue and also developing a plan for future action.</para>
<para>I want to share with the Senate a number of what I think are very critical statistics from that report that really do remind us of how critically important this issue is. Forty-four per cent of grandparent carers in Western Australia are single, and most often they are women. Seventy per cent of families with grandparent carers have a grandmother as the primary or sole carer. Seventy-seven per cent of grandparent carers are 50 to 69 years old. One to two more grandchildren are raised by Aboriginal grandparent carers than by non-Aboriginal grandparent carers.</para>
<para>Let's just think about the grandchildren. The report reminds us that 50 per cent of children came into care due to parent alcohol and/or drug use. Twelve per cent lived with their grandparents for longer than 10 years, with 16 per cent entering the informal care of their grandparents aged 10 to 14 years. Twenty per cent came into care aged one year old or less.</para>
<para>This is the image I would like people to think about when I remind them of these statistics. Think about the statistics not as numbers but as an image. Seventy-seven per cent of grandparent carers are 50 to 69 years of age; 44 per cent of them are single, most often women; and 20 per cent of grandchildren came into the care—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>281558</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Senator Smith. We will now proceed to two-minute statements.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>36</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WALSH</name>
    <name.id>252157</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Prime Minister Morrison took a baby step recently. He actually said sorry for the failures in his vaccine rollout—sort of. Prime Minister Morrison said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I'm certainly sorry we haven't been able to achieve the marks we hope for at the beginning of this year.</para></quote>
<para>It was not, 'I'm sorry I failed to pick up the phone and get the vaccines that we needed when we needed them.' It was not, 'I'm sorry I insisted getting Australians vaccinated wasn't a race.' It was not, 'I'm sorry that my inaction has meant that millions of Australians have been in lockdowns this year.' And it was not, 'I'm sorry for the hurt and harm that I have caused the Australian people.' Prime Minister Morrison's apology just doesn't quite cut it. It doesn't cut it for all the Australians who have had to close their businesses. It doesn't cut it for all the Australians who have lost their jobs. It doesn't cut it for all the Australians who can't see their families and friends today due to the Morrison lockdowns.</para>
<para>Our Prime Minister doesn't know how to give a real apology, so I have some tips for him. I suspect they may come in handy in the future. Prime Minister, a real apology isn't followed up by a 'but'. A really apology comes from the heart. You actually need to mean it. A real apology acknowledges and accepts the damage that you've caused without excuses. You don't downplay your mistakes and you certainly don't blame others for your failures. That is how you give a real apology. That is the apology the Prime Minister owes Australians and, sadly, it's the apology they will never hear from this Prime Minister.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Auditor-General</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RENNICK</name>
    <name.id>283596</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The great Roman writer Juvenal asked: who will judge the judges? Today the question needs to be asked: who will audit the Auditor-General? Why do I ask that question? It's because the Auditor-General is refusing to hand over minutes of a meeting between his staff and the staff in the infrastructure department about the purchase of Leppington Triangle. Why does that matter? It's because audits are all about transparency and the Auditor-General himself needs to practise what he preaches. He has been very critical of government record keeping, but when I asked in a question on notice in estimates for their records of the correspondence they refused to hand it over and said: 'The audit office does not release specific items of audit evidence that were not included in the audit report as the public interest benefit in providing the audit evidence is outweighed by the potential for public interest harm.' What a load of tosh. Public interest harm? Give me a break.</para>
<para>Why is the Audit Office engaging in a gross cover-up? Is it to try and hide their incompetence in the grossly misleading report on the Leppington Triangle, where they: made a fundamental error of fact in placing the triangle outside the airport zone; failed to take into contact the benefits outlined in a report showing that the airport would contribute $32 billion to GDP by 2060 and create 70,000 jobs; ignored AASB 13, which says non-financial assets must be valued at the highest and best use by market participants, regardless of intent; and ignored case law that has repeatedly ruled that land must be purchased for its highest and best use? The Auditor-General has misled the people of Australia by using incorrect zoning and averaging the lowest valuation rather than using the highest valuation in order to smear the government and stop the construction of nation-building infrastructure.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor's utter capitulation on tax policy is so saddening and so devastating for the millions of Australians who believe in progressive taxation and economic fairness. By backing in the stage 3 income tax cuts, negative gearing and capital gains tax discount, Labor has ensured that, no matter who wins the next election, economic inequality will keep spiralling, the rich will keep getting richer and, for everyone else, the hope that they can enjoy their fair share of prosperity will ebb away even more quickly than it already is. We'll see cuts to spending on essential services, houses prices reaching even more ridiculous heights, more people forced into homelessness and young people, whether they be renters or aspiring home owners, having to spend even more to have a home.</para>
<para>This Labor capitulation follows exactly the same pattern as what they've done on climate change, public subsidies for burning fossil fuels, the war on nature, the torture of refugees and the descent into a surveillance state. It allows the LNP and Australia to lurch even further to the right and further into neoliberalism. The only way we can break this cycle, and break this cycle we must, is to put the Greens into the balance of power in the House and in the Senate. Turf the current government out and allow the Greens, in the balance of power, to be in a position to force a new Labor government to be more progressive and force them to act more strongly and more quickly on climate and economic inequality. That is what we must do to save our country from the neoliberals.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Small Business: Cocos (Keeling) Islands</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McCARTHY</name>
    <name.id>122087</name.id>
    <electorate>Northern Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] The Cocos (Keeling) Islands, part of my Northern Territory electorate, are an unspoilt Indian Ocean paradise. But, unfortunately for business operators the O'Dowd-Liu family, their piece of paradise has become bogged down in a nightmare of bureaucratic and ministerial negligence. In March this year, the family's business premises, Cocos Autos, was burnt to the ground. It was the only authorised mechanical workshop on the island. Their loss is estimated at over $350,000 and there is no insurance service provider on the island. This has been devastating, as it would be for to any small business already feeling the impacts of COVID, with a big reduction in tourism related activity.</para>
<para>Helen Liu and David O'Dowd have been trying with no luck to lease suitable alternative premises since March, in a place where the landlord is effectively the Commonwealth government. I raised these issues in estimates, and just this week received some scant answers to the many questions I asked. I also wrote to the Assistant Minister for Regional Development and Territories, Nola Marino, urging her to help in finding a suitable new home for Cocos Autos. The Assistant Minister has not bothered to reply or assist the family in any way. They are facing severe financial and personal pressures, as they cannot relocate their business. They have lost the majority of their income and have, unfortunately, had to lay off staff. Their inability to offer a full service to the island is impacting upon other businesses and residents, who have no alternative for repairs of automotive equipment.</para>
<para>Cocos islanders deserve so much better than to be ignored by this Morrison government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing Affordability</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>266524</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There will be no family home on a block of land in the future, according to the Greens, Labor, the Liberal Party and their sellout sidekicks, the Nationals—not even a 500-, 400- or 300-square-metre block on which to raise a family. The next generation will lose access to land entirely. Town planning now is based on everyday Australians being herded into expensive housing bands located away from the elitist inner-city bubble. This shepherding together is designed to feed massive new urban rail networks to bring workers—or, more accurately, feudal serfs—into central business districts. Once workers, or serfs, catch the train home, inner cities become ghost towns filled with expensive restaurants and rats. Cars are being phased out right now. New housing precincts do not have roads wide enough for two cars to pass. They're being designed for a world where workers do not own cars. Proposed building codes include five storeys with no lift, lower ceilings, thinner walls, narrower corridors, towers built to the four corners of the block and zero green space. Although land is an asset that lasts for ever, a cheap and nasty home unit lasts as long as the building does, and then owners have nothing.</para>
<para>The Greens, Labor and Liberal-Nationals say this is all that working Australians deserve. The Morrison government is pumping up house prices to force young families into tiny and expensive housing. How do parents raise happy, healthy children in a tiny unit in a tower that's home to 20 other families on a block of land that used to house one family?</para>
<para>One Nation rejects this dystopian future, this future of human misery, squalor, oppression, disease and overcrowding. One Nation policies will ensure sensible population growth, the building of water and energy capacity and the revival of manufacturing, for a life worth living for all Australians. We will not be divided. We have one flag. We are one community. We are one nation.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indigenous Ranger Program</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BROCKMAN</name>
    <name.id>30484</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Saturday, 31 July, was World Rangers Day, where we celebrate the work of rangers around the world in protecting our planet's natural environment. Today I would like to acknowledge Australian Indigenous rangers, who make a significant contribution in protecting Australia's national heritage. The Indigenous rangers combine traditional knowledge with conservation training to help protect and manage Australia's natural heritage. They undertake a range of important projects, including activities such as bushfire mitigation and the protection of threatened species. They also play a critical role in Australia's national biosecurity system, particularly in northern Australia, where they work to combat exotics pests and diseases as a key part of the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy.</para>
<para>The Morrison government has committed to long-term funding for the Indigenous Ranger Program, with the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, the Hon. Ken Wyatt MP, announcing an additional $746 million over the next seven years to provide ongoing support for over 80 organisations engaged in land and sea management. This will support 1,900 Indigenous jobs, and it is a demonstration of the Morrison government's continued commitment to respecting the unique relationship that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have with the land. Examples from my home state include the Midwest Aboriginal Ranger Program, in the seat of Durack, and the Spinifex Land Management Rangers, in the seat of O'Connor. The benefits offered by this program are clear on two fronts: they achieve broad economic and environmental goals. We must always remember that these programs are occurring in places with a very thin economic base and yet an essential requirement for ongoing land management services. So this is certainly a win-win situation for all.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Independent Review into Circumstances relating to the Death of Ann-Marie Smith</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GRIFF</name>
    <name.id>76760</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] In question time yesterday, I asked Senator Reynolds, the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, about the government's response to the Robertson review. That review was prompted by the appalling and tragic death of Ann-Marie Smith after extreme neglect by her NDIS carer. I asked how many of the review's 10 recommendations had been implemented, and the minister took the question on notice. Her response, tabled at the end of question time, shocked me. One year on, just one recommendation has been implemented. This is simply unacceptable.</para>
<para>The minister must recognise that these recommendations are intended to ensure the safety and dignity of NDIS participants. The implementation of recommendations may be a routine matter for government, a matter of process, but it is not routine for those who depend on the NDIS. For them, it is necessary and it is urgent. We must do better in delivering the changes. Speaking after the death of Ms Smith, the minister said that no Australian should ever have to die the way that she did. If the minister genuinely believes this—and I think she does—then I would ask her to get seriously involved, to take immediate action to progress these changes and to provide comfort and assurance to those who are in our care. They deserve nothing less.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'NEILL</name>
    <name.id>140651</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to remark on the Global Partnership for Education Replenishment, which happened in London last week, very ably chaired and led by former Prime Minister of our great country Julia Gillard. As Benjamin Franklin once said, an investment in knowledge pays the best interest. Australia's investment in that recent GPE replenishment, an amount of $180 million over five years, will pay untold dividends in the lives of thousands and thousands of children. While this wasn't the full $70 million per year that was requested by the GPE, our contribution will nonetheless make a great difference.</para>
<para>I want to acknowledge Kevin Andrews, who, with me, co-chairs the Parliamentary Friends of Education. He garnered the signatures of 40 Australian parliamentarians—from both the Senate and the House and from all parties and the crossbench—to encourage Senator Payne, as the foreign minister, to make this commitment. I acknowledge the efforts of every single one of those colleagues and I thank Senator Payne for making that important commitment on behalf of the Australian people. Overall, the global education summit raised no small sum—$4 billion was committed, which is 80 per cent of the target that they sought to reach, with countries like Australia making a contribution.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge the 19 heads of state of recipient countries who pledged to spend $192 billion of their domestic education budget to boost education outcomes. We know that the money that is invested by Australia will be very significant in changing the life outcomes of young people in our friend countries across the Pacific—in particular, Vanuatu, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Solomon Islands and Tonga. It will build schools, make sure the systems are robust, and give kids the chance to not only get to school but receive a quality qualification.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Homelessness</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator STEELE-JOHN</name>
    <name.id>250156</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] This week is National Homelessness Week and our community here in Perth is in mourning. We are in mourning for the death of no less than 56 of our community's members who lost their life in the last year alone to homelessness on the streets of our city. Yesterday, there was a vigil held for those who have lost their lives. It was triggered by the death of Alana Garlett, a First Nations woman who died on 18 June after sleeping overnight outside the Wesley Church here in Perth. As one of the 56 members of our community who we have lost this year, her death triggered an outpouring of grief and a deep desire for action, driven by the knowledge that this housing and homelessness crisis that we are suffering through is disproportionately impacting First Nations people and that the average age of those 56 was just 47 years.</para>
<para>Here in WA, we have the wealth to solve this problem. There are tens of thousands of people on our public housing waiting list. Our state is about to register a $5 billion budget surplus. With that, the Labor and Liberal parties will have run out of excuses for inaction. Our community understands that the existence of homelessness is the result of political inaction. In the name of Alana Garlett, we demand that action now be taken. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Anti-Corruption Commission</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak briefly on the need for a federal anti-corruption commission. This is a major concern for Independents in both houses. The Independents continue to keep this issue at the forefront of federal politics through this parliament. Labor has committed to establish a national anti-corruption commission if they are elected to government and to advancing proposals to improve governance and transparency in federal grants programs. As for the coalition government, they really are a lost cause as far as the question of integrity is concerned. They have deliberately dragged their feet to make sure a federal ICAC will not be operating during this parliament. The former Attorney-General, Christian Porter, bears a lot of responsibility for this, but ultimately it is the Prime Minister who must be held to account.</para>
<para>Why hasn't the government expedited a national anti-corruption commission? The answer is simple. They are politically corrupt. From sports rorts to the pork-barrel car-park grants scheme, from dodgy water purchases to politically directed community safety projects, we have seen integrity standards plummet. The Prime Minister is no doubt focused on a new round of pork-barrelling for the next election. Of course, Labor, notwithstanding recent good intentions, has plenty of form at both a state and a federal level. After all, the first sports rorts were from Labor minister Ros Kelly and her infamous whiteboard. Whatever the results of the election, the Independents will have to continue to do a lot of hard work in this area.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Vaccination</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator POLLEY</name>
    <name.id>e5x</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] The Morrison Liberal government has been criticised for the slow and miscommunicated rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine across Tasmania and Australia, and with good reason. Australia's travelling at a snail's pace with this rollout. We are behind 80 other countries in terms of ranking of vaccination rollouts. If you look at the Australian workforce, frontline workers within the retail and transport sectors were not considered to be frontline workers under this tired eight-year-old Morrison Liberal government. But it was the frontline retail staff at our major supermarkets and retail chains who stood at their checkouts fighting the brunt of this pandemic. It was the truck drivers across the country who delivered the goods that kept Australia moving—goods for our homes, our businesses and our Australian way of life. Without these truck drivers, we would have come to a complete standstill. Labor stands side by side with these workers and always will.</para>
<para>If you look at the rollout within the aged-care and the disability sectors, the numbers are distressing to say the very least. People are still dying in this country because of the inactions of not only the Prime Minister but the minister for health, Greg Hunt, through the mishandling of the outbreaks, the slow rollout of vaccines and the lack of having specialised quarantine facilities. We also have a dismal vaccine rate for people in disability homes and disability carers, with only one-third currently having been vaccinated. Why are ministers like Senator Colbeck and Minister Hunt still not being held accountable for their failures? I wish those opposite would treat all Australians fairly, especially Australians who are working on the front line.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Media: Sky News</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator FARUQI</name>
    <name.id>250362</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] It was welcome but not totally surprising to see that <inline font-style="italic">Sky News</inline> Australia this week has been temporarily banned from YouTube for sharing videos involving COVID misinformation. It is such a poor reflection on our media and political establishment that this extremist, conspiratorial, racist news channel is still considered normal and acceptable by so many. Only hours after the ban was reported, the Treasurer went on Sky for an interview as if nothing had happened. It is also such a poor reflection on our media regulator that YouTube, which notoriously has itself boosted the proliferation of far-Right content online, is better at holding <inline font-style="italic">Sky News</inline> accountable than the actual watchdog.</para>
<para>When I joined parliament, I made a conscious decision not to engage with this far-Right toxic news channel, and I believe that decision has been vindicated time and again. <inline font-style="italic">Sky News</inline> serves no purpose in our democracy—in fact, it harms our democracy and makes people in our community less safe. It should be treated as the extremist, dangerous, divisive news channel that it is. Predictably and laughably <inline font-style="italic">Sky News</inline> claims to be the victim of so-called cancel culture in all of this. What nonsense. Being held accountable for spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories is not an impingement on your freedom of speech. In fact, the most disappointing aspect of this whole saga has been that it hasn't happened sooner. I could list the dozens of incidents involving racism, soft platforms given to far-Right figures and conspiracy theorising, but these are all on the public record. I hope this week is a turning point for people's tolerance of <inline font-style="italic">Sky News</inline>. We have to draw a line in the sand somewhere, and it's beyond time that <inline font-style="italic">Sky News</inline> is held accountable for its extremism and far-Right toxicity.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Defence Force</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator VAN</name>
    <name.id>283601</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's well known that we in Australia have a world-class Defence Force, arguably one of the best in the world. We have men and women who are proud members of our Air Force, Army and Navy and who serve their country with distinction and honour. The Brereton report, released last year, brought to light that it was possible a small group of people within our ADF may not have acted in accordance with the values and standards that their fellow service men and women uphold so proudly. The transparent and dignified way that our Chief of Defence Force and his leadership team have managed this is a true mark of their strength and integrity. Recently, Defence released its response to the Brereton inquiry, setting out a clear and deliberate reform program. The reform program will address past actions and take appropriate action where needed to prevent unwelcome behaviour from occurring again. The inquiry made 191 findings and 143 recommendations. Defence has accepted all the findings and is committed to addressing all the recommendations made.</para>
<para>At times like this it is also important to remember the work that the ADF do. Their clear and primary mission is to protect Australia's national security interests, but over and above that, they help state governments during the pandemic or bushfires, when they assist with rescue operations and medical and disaster relief, or we can look further afield to where our ADF members have been deployed to assist our family in the Pacific. We should also reflect on both the significant achievements and heartbreaking sacrifices made on battlefields around the world, most recently in the Middle East. Sacrifices are still being made today as our people spend long periods of time away from their families. I thank those people serving in our Defence Force for keeping Australia safe.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Vaccination</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator AYRES</name>
    <name.id>16913</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Last month the Deputy Prime Minister was asked on <inline font-style="italic">Insiders</inline> about the vaccine rollout in regional Australia. He said, 'We're doing quite well.' Figures released yesterday show the truth. Regional Australia is being left behind by the vaccine rollout. His own electorate has one of the lowest vaccination rates in the state. Scott Morrison's utter failure on vaccines has resulted in less than one in five Australians being fully vaccinated. That, along with the failed hotel quarantine and more infections has led to more infections, more deaths and more lockdowns, like in Sydney today. But it's much worse in regional New South Wales. In the far west and Orana, 13 per cent are vaccinated; the Hunter Valley, 14 per cent; Coffs Harbour and Grafton, 14.6 per cent; his own electorate of New England, a touch over 15 per cent. Regional Australia has enough problems in accessing decent, affordable health care, but this has been made much harder.</para>
<para>It's going to be harder for regional communities to access hospitals and respirators in the event of a COVID outbreak. We saw this during the Spanish flu, which ravaged regional communities and, disproportionately, Aboriginal communities more than it did the cities. Now the opportunity to vaccinate those communities in advance of this last round of infections has been squandered. In the last 12 months National Party MPs have clearly spent more time plotting against each other, focused on their own jobs, than on doing the job that they're required to do. National Party members like Senators Canavan and Rennick have done more than anybody else to undermine the public health effort by spreading conspiracy theories. At the end, it's about vaccine supply and Scott Morrison having to do his job.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Coal Industry</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CANAVAN</name>
    <name.id>245212</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In the limited time I have available I will say thank you to the Collinsville mine and the workers there, who hosted us last week. I was there with the member for Capricornia, Michelle Landry, and the member for Dawson, George Christensen. We were joined by the mayor of Whitsunday, Mr Andrew Willcox. It was great to get out to a coal mine in North Queensland and thank all the hard workers at that mine for what they do for our country, the wealth they produce, which we really need now to help our country through this pandemic. I also talked to them about their jobs and livelihoods, about issues like casualisation, their pay and the rights they now have thanks to legislation passed in this parliament, under which they can convert to permanent work. I must say that we were proud to be there as members of this government, which supports our coal miners. We happily posted photos. Some of the guys wanted to have a selfie with us, and we put them upon our social media. We're proud of the workers of this nation.</para>
<para>We had a visitor up in Queensland in the last few weeks, the Leader of the Labor Party. He camped up there, north of the Tweed. There was not a single photo with workers in the coalmining industry posted on his social media feed. Where was he? There is no evidence that he actually visited a coalmine. T here is more evidence that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon than there is that the Labor Party visited workers and celebrated the coal industry in this great nation.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>41</page.no>
        <type>MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to advise the chamber that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Payne, is detained in international calls that are running slightly over time. Minister Payne wishes to extend her apologies to the chamber. She will endeavour to be here as soon as possible, and I am advised she will be here during this question time. If there are early questions for Senator Payne, I will take them, but otherwise I thank the chamber for their understanding.</para>
</speech>
</debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>41</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Vaccination</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SHELDON</name>
    <name.id>168275</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Aged Care, Senator Colbeck. Can the minister confirm that less than 15 per cent of Australians aged 15 and over have been fully vaccinated in south-west Sydney, which is one of the lowest vaccination rates in New South Wales?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] The vaccination rollout continues to gather pace. As of yesterday, over 12 million doses of vaccine had been administered across the country. We continue to work collaboratively with the states to provide more opportunities for more Australians to access the vaccine, and we continue to grow the number of—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Colbeck, I have Senator Wong on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Wong</name>
    <name.id>00AOU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The point of order is on direct relevance. It was a very precise question which simply asked the minister to confirm a particular fact about south-west Sydney vaccination rates.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have previously ruled that specific questions that are very factual will be interpreted very tightly when it comes to direct relevance. You've reminded the minister of the question. I notice he has been speaking for just over 30 seconds. I will listen carefully to him turning to the specific nature of the question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We continue to provide opportunities for Australians to access the vaccine and we continue to increase the number of outlets available to Australians to access the vaccine.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Wong, on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Wong</name>
    <name.id>00AOU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I repeat my previous point of order, on direct relevance, and point out that the minister is ignoring your advice to him.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have been reluctant, in my time in this role, to do what happens in the other place—to call ministers' attention to the specific nature of a question without a point of order being raised. I don't want to have to start making that habit. I think it interrupts the free flow of debate in the chamber. But, Minister, I am going to ask you to turn to the specific nature of what was a specifically worded question rather than address the general terms of the vaccination policy.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In New South Wales, as of 3 pm yesterday, over 42 per cent of the New South Wales population eligible for vaccination had received their first dose and over 20 per cent were fully vaccinated. I don't have the specific details of a particular area of Sydney with me. Over the last seven days, we have administered over 450,000 doses in New South Wales. As at 3 August, 4,139,773 doses had been administered in New South Wales. As I've said a number of times, we continue to grow the pace of the vaccine rollout. We continue to grow the number of outlets available to Australians to access the vaccine, through a number of various different types of outlet. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Sheldon, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SHELDON</name>
    <name.id>168275</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can the minister confirm that, in Logan-Beaudesert, one of 11 local government areas in lockdown in South-East Queensland, only 13.2 per cent of Australians are vaccinated, the third-lowest rate in the nation?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Again, I don't have specific details of a particular local government area with me but, to assist the chamber, as at 11:59 on 3 August, there have been 2.387 million doses administered in Queensland. Over 38 per cent of the Queensland population eligible for vaccination have received their first dose and 19 per cent are fully vaccinated. We continue to work closely with the Queensland government to provide both vaccines and support for Queensland's vaccination program. This week, ending 8 August, the Commonwealth will provide Queensland with just under 80,000 doses of Pfizer vaccine and there will be also 49,600 doses of AstraZeneca, and over 47,000 doses of Pfizer vaccine— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Sheldon, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SHELDON</name>
    <name.id>168275</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Does the Morrison government take responsibility for such low vaccination rates?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Clearly, the government is responsible for the vaccine rollout; therefore, it takes responsibility for the vaccinations that have occurred around Australia. But, as I have said a number of times to the chamber and as the government has said on a number of occasions, as the supply of vaccine has increased so have we increased the capacity and the availability of vaccine for the Australian people. We have continued to grow the number of vaccines supplied to Australians over recent weeks. In fact, the last two million vaccines to be administered have taken less than six days per million. So the rate of the rollout continues to grow, the number of outlets available for Australians to access a vaccine continues to grow, and we continue to have the objective of making a vaccine available to all Australians who want one by the end of this year.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CHANDLER</name>
    <name.id>264449</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Women's Safety, Senator Ruston. Can the minister please update the Senate on how the Liberal and Nationals government is working towards the goal of ending violence against women and their children?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RUSTON</name>
    <name.id>243273</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank Senator Chandler for her question on this extraordinarily important subject. The Morrison government is absolutely focused on making Australia a place that is free from violence against women and their children. We demonstrated our commitment to ending domestic, family and sexual violence against women in the 2021-22 budget, where we made the largest ever commitment to women's safety with our $1.1 billion package. This absolutely historic package is a key measure that will contribute towards the zero target that this government is absolutely committed to.</para>
<para>Importantly, the package is also a down payment on the next national plan, not only to reduce violence but to end violence against women and their children. Working towards this important goal, the next national plan absolutely must be an ambitious blueprint to stop the rot that is family, domestic and sexual violence across our national landscape. It will not only build on the previous work of the previous national plan but it will respond to urgent new issues that we're facing today and build a base for emerging issues that are likely to occur into the future.</para>
<para>The upcoming women's safety summit on 6 and 7 September this year will be a critical step in the development of this new plan. The summit will provide us with an opportunity to shine a light on the terrible violence that women from all walks of life experience in Australia. It will discuss key issues of women's safety, including financial security, policing and justice responses, sexual violence and the challenges facing diverse members of the Australian community. The two-day program will also include a series of roundtables that will inform the consultation process as we work towards developing the next national plan. By bringing together a cross section of Australian community, the voices of all Australians will have the opportunity to be heard.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Chandler, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CHANDLER</name>
    <name.id>264449</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Minister, for that update. Minister, can you please outline the other measures the government is implementing to support Australians who are escaping family and domestic violence?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RUSTON</name>
    <name.id>243273</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We have a number of measures that we're putting in place because we believe, first and foremost, that when women are making the brave decision to escape a violent situation they need to have a safe place to go. That is why we're providing $144 million for the escaping violence payment and we have provided $72.6 million for the safe places program across the country. The escaping violence program will provide immediate access to funds for women and children when they flee a violent situation, to allow them to pay for things such as school fees, rental bonds and the like. The safe places funding bolsters the $1.6 billion already provided in housing and homelessness funding to make sure that we have new emergency accommodation built specifically for women escaping violence. Safe places will help nearly 6½ thousand women and children every year not just in metropolitan areas but also across rural and regional Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Chandler, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CHANDLER</name>
    <name.id>264449</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Minister, could you please advise how the government is helping to improve responses for victims of sexual violence?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RUSTON</name>
    <name.id>243273</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently I visited the Monash University Department of Forensic Medicine, which had received $4.5 million from the government to develop and implement Australia's first accredited training course for health practitioners and frontline workers to improve their responses to sexual violence victims. Participants in the courses that are being run by Monash University will learn how to identify risk factors and respond to disclosures in sensitive and appropriate ways. It's absolutely vital that, when someone discloses an experience of sexual violence, their disclosure is handled appropriately and with care. We believe that, by arming and training healthcare professionals with expertise so that they can understand the signs, the symptoms and the risks that are associated with violence, we can assist many, many more people. I want to take this opportunity to urge anyone who needs support to call 1800RESPECT at any time of the day.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Vaccination</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'NEILL</name>
    <name.id>140651</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Health, Senator Colbeck. Can the minister confirm that, under Mr Morrison's latest announcement, Australians will continue to face lockdowns even with 70 per cent of the eligible population vaccinated?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I can confirm that, at the rate of 70 per cent of the eligible population being vaccinated, there is still some scope for lockdowns under the Doherty institute modelling. The modelling contemplates those sorts of circumstances occurring as a part of the development of the phased plan for reopening the economy. There are a number of targets that talk about the progressive rates of vaccination within the country increasing to provide more and more freedoms. That's the point of the exercise: that the Australian community can understand the circumstances under which they might enjoy more freedoms; the circumstances by which governments—state, territory and Commonwealth—may make decisions about reopening the economy and the community. That is the point of the government commissioning the Doherty modelling, so that those circumstances would be clear to the Australian people.</para>
<para>It is contemplated that there still could be lockdowns under those circumstances, particularly as we see new variants of COVID-19 coming into circulation. Those circumstances may change, as they have done throughout the pandemic, and we will have to be prepared, as we have done so far, to adjust to those new variants and the new circumstances. But the Doherty Institute modelling has been put in place so Australians have a full understanding of the circumstances about reopening the community and the economy.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator O'Neill, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'NEILL</name>
    <name.id>140651</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can the minister confirm that under Mr Morrison's latest announcement Australians will continue to face lockdowns even with 80 per cent of the eligible population vaccinated?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Again, that is contemplated in the Doherty modelling. The Doherty modelling talks about when at least 80 per cent of the adult population is fully vaccinated we can consider transition to phase C, which is regarded in the plan as the vaccination consolidation phase. Measures may include minimum ongoing baseline restrictions adjusted to minimise cases without lockdowns or highly targeted lockdowns only. The whole purpose of this vaccination process and the plan is to minimise serious illness, hospitalisations and fatalities. But we are going to have to continue to be prepared to adjust, as we have been throughout the pandemic as new variants to the virus have occurred. So, yes, there are targeted lockdowns contemplated. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator O'Neill, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'NEILL</name>
    <name.id>140651</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When asked yesterday, Minister, what date the 70 per cent target will be reached, you said, 'The government deliberately has not established a date for that to occur.' Why is the Morrison government keeping Australians in the dark? Is it because Mr Morrison doesn't want to take responsibility for meeting his own targets?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I completely reject the insinuation by the question. We want all Australians to front up and get vaccinated as soon as possible. Reaching the targets and putting the targets into the public domain is putting the power into reopening the economy back into the hands of Australians. That's the point of it. Australians can understand what the thresholds are for the reopening of the economy, and they can then work towards meeting the targets. Our responsibility, the responsibility of the government, is to make available the vaccine and make available as many as possible outlets for Australians to access the vaccine.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator O'Neill interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, Senator O'Neill!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator COLBECK</name>
    <name.id>00AOL</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That is our responsibility. So we deliberately haven't set a target. We make no apology for that. But Australians now know the circumstances— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Media</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to Senator Birmingham representing the Prime Minister. Last week Sky News was banned from YouTube for spreading COVID-19 medical misinformation. Sky is broadcast on subscription and free-to-air television. What is the Morrison government doing to prevent the spread of COVID misinformation on our TV screens, and what's the role of the government's television and media regulator?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank Senator Hanson-Young for her question. The provision of accurate information in relation to all health matters, but particularly in relation to COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, is particularly important. The government is investing in communications to ensure that accurate, timely information is provided to Australians to give them reassurance about the facts around the COVID-19 vaccine availability, about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines as well. Those information measures that the government undertakes are important means of communicating with the Australian people along with, indeed, the support provided by many, be they by many in the media, be they by many in public life. Even people like the member for Maribyrnong, I note have being quite vocal in their information provision in relation to vaccines, including the AstraZeneca vaccine. I welcome that.</para>
<para>Obviously our media regulators are empowered under Australian laws to act where necessary. They have the processes in place in relation to the way in which they respond to complaints, conduct investigations and respond to such matters. Those processes don't involve political interference, but I am happy to seek any further information in terms of actions those regulators may be taking that could be provided to the chamber.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Hanson-Young, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Rennick and George Christensen MP, both members of the Morrison government, have made several statements that have been flagged by online platforms like Facebook because they contradict medical advice and undermine medical experts. What is the Prime Minister doing to stop the spread of COVID misinformation from those sabotaging his own health response?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As I indicated before, the government takes very seriously the importance of ensuring accurate and timely information is provided to Australians, providing them with reassurance about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. I restate in this place the very thorough process that Australia went through. Unlike other parts of the world where there were emergency listings that short-cut regulatory approvals, in Australia we went through the thorough processes of the Therapeutic Goods Administration to ensure the safety of the vaccines. In this country we have developed a type of modelling that, as you've heard from Senator Colbeck, outlines very clearly the efficacy of those vaccines. The fact is that, be it the Pfizer vaccine or the AstraZeneca vaccine, they reduce the rate of serious illness and indeed death by up to 90 per cent for each— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Hanson-Young, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>YouTube has a policy that it doesn't allow content that spreads medical misinformation about COVID-19 that contradicts medical information about COVID-19 from local health authorities or the World Health Organization. It seems YouTube has higher standards for facts and truth than this government. What are you doing to stop those sabotaging your health response who are members of your own government?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I make it clear that false information shared online can create public confusion and can be harmful and create difficulties for vulnerable people in our community. That's why, as the government, we have developed a code of practice on disinformation and misinformation. It's why we have in place the regulatory processes that I spoke about before. As I indicated, I will bring back to the chamber any information in terms of regulatory actions underway.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Services Australia</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator ASKEW</name>
    <name.id>281558</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Government Services, Senator Reynolds. Could the minister describe how Services Australia is supporting Australians in the current lockdowns?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator REYNOLDS</name>
    <name.id>250216</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank Senator Askew for that question. Indeed, I'm delighted to answer this question. Services Australia is truly the engine room of government support for all Australians. Throughout this pandemic, the Morrison government have ensured that services are delivered seamlessly and efficiently when and where they are needed most by Australians. We've quickly and efficiently bolstered the Australian Immunisation Register and myGov. We have applied fast-moving Centrelink payment changes and supported much-needed telehealth items through the MBS. We have also paused debt raising and recovery in lockdown areas in New South Wales and Queensland.</para>
<para>When we make policy decisions, it's Services Australia that's on the receiving end of hundreds of thousands of claims, phone calls and questions. It's now setting and regularly breaking its own records for social security and welfare telephony and processing channels and also now for digital claims. In the past two months alone during these current lockdowns, it has approved over 1.4 million COVID disaster payments totalling $1.33 billion and it's supporting over 900,000 Australians. Yesterday alone more than 1,600 income support customers in New South Wales who have lost more than eight hours work applied for the additional support payment.</para>
<para>There are so many ways to serve our nation either in or out of uniform. On behalf of all Australians I would like to thank from the bottom of my heart—and I'm sure yours—all Services Australia staff for their unwavering focus, urgency and momentum towards supporting Australians during natural disasters. Their work is sometimes an unsung service to their nation. I know many Australians are very grateful for their service.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Askew, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator ASKEW</name>
    <name.id>281558</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Minister, how have Services Australia had to adapt to meet demand?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator REYNOLDS</name>
    <name.id>250216</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At every stage of the pandemic the Morrison government has adjusted to support Australians and ensure that services are delivered seamlessly, efficiently and as quickly as we can. Services Australia have mobilised more than 18,000 internal and external staff to ensure that calls and claims for the COVID-19 disaster payment are processed as quickly as possible. In some cases that has been as quick as being in the bank in 40 minutes.</para>
<para>What does this mobilisation look like? It includes over 600 new staff and over 250 APS surge staff from other departments and agencies. Over 4,000 agency staff who usually undertake other roles have been redeployed to this effort and over 13,000 staff from the customer service delivery group are prioritising the COVID-19 disaster payment at this time. I again thank them for their efforts and work in stepping up and supporting all Australians.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Askew, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator ASKEW</name>
    <name.id>281558</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Minister, how has the Liberal and National government communicated support available to impacted communities?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator REYNOLDS</name>
    <name.id>250216</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Morrison government is indeed here to support all Australians. That includes our CALD communities. We do understand the challenges faced by many of these communities, particularly in Western Sydney at the moment. Our government, through Services Australia, is ensuring that information available on support is accessible to all Australians, with content now translated into 63 different languages to help many of those communities. Multicultural service officers are also working directly with the community. Also in language interviews have been made available to provide information about this payment. The payment is available to Australian residents and eligible working visa holders who meet the eligibility criteria. People can also call 131202 to talk to Services Australia in languages other than English.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Birmingham. In his announcement on 2 July, during the delta outbreak in Sydney, Mr Morrison declared that in phase b 'lockdowns would only occur in extreme circumstances'. Given Mr Morrison's announcement last Friday, can the minister confirm this statement is no longer true?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Following the release of the Doherty Institute modelling yesterday, all senators and all Australians have the opportunity to see both the content of that modelling and the way in which the modelling outlines the impact of different vaccination levels on expected rates of transmission, on expected rates of contraction of COVID-19 and on the seriousness of the consequences of that and how that shifts at different levels of vaccination across the population. It also outlines different phases of restrictions that could be applied at those different rates.</para>
<para>It is correct that, in terms of the different phases of moving through, variations in the types of restrictions that may be necessary at different levels were made to make sure that we could have an appropriately staged approach at the different levels of vaccination through the modelling. This is entirely consistent with an approach of seeking to follow scientific and medical advice in the handling of the pandemic. What the government has done in terms of seeking to chart a pathway of reopening is listened to that scientific and medical advice. We are one of the few countries in the world to have had the opportunity to take that advice and adapt policy along the way according to that advice and information—some of the best practice in the world. We are one of the few countries in the world to have had that opportunity to do so. That is because, as a country, notwithstanding the many difficulties and uncertainties in responding to a global pandemic, we have been in a position where lives have been saved, where we have been able to act in accordance with advice and where we are able to make sure that we get it right before we move to those next stages.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Gallagher, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In his announcement on 2 July, in the midst of a delta outbreak, Mr Morrison declared that in phase C there would be 'no lockdowns'. Can the minister confirm that this is not true and that in phase C Australians will, in fact, be subjected to more lockdowns in a whole range of circumstances?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I refer the senator to the answer I just gave and to the answer that Senator Colbeck gave previously. The answer I just gave outlined very clearly the fact that the government outlined the potential stages for reopening. The government asked the Doherty Institute to undertake modelling against those sorts of processes. In the process of undertaking that modelling it became apparent that there needed to be differences in those stages to be able to work successfully through reopening. The government fully expects that. That's why the government was asking for expert advice. It's why we have done so. As Senator Colbeck said before, the advice as published makes clear that in the third phase limited targeted lockdowns may be necessary in certain extreme circumstances. That is there in that public advice. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Gallagher,a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last year Mr Morrison and his ministers consistently criticised the Victorian lockdown. This year he has gone from urging Victoria to lift restrictions and commending New South Wales for not going into full lockdown in June to declaring in July that 'lockdowns are absolutely necessary and there's no other way through'. How can Australians possibly believe a word Mr Morrison says?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Sometimes when I stand here and look opposite I'm not sure whether I'm seeing a whole world of Nostradamuses across from me or people who just think that they have the wonderful benefit of 20/20 hindsight.</para>
<para>Opposition senators interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order on my left, Senator Wong.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A very obvious point that was missing from Senator Gallagher's question was any recognition of the reality of the existence of the delta variant. A 100 per cent increase in the transmissibility of COVID-19 is a factor in relation to the delta variant. Having changed the results in a 100 per cent increase—</para>
<para>Opposition senators interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I can barely hear Senator Birmingham.</para>
<para>An opposition senator interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He does have a loud voice. Senator Gallagher, on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Gallagher</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The leader of the government is misleading—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That's not a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Gallagher</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I did mention the delta outbreak. It's misleading to say—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That's not a point of order, Senator Gallagher.</para>
<para>Opposition senators interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! There's an opportunity to debate answers after question time. We have senators operating remotely. I ask again for the courtesy of the Senate to allow them to hear it, because if I can't, they can't.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The fact is the circumstances we face now are quite different to the circumstances we faced as a country 12 months ago. At the time of the Victorian lockdown last year—</para>
<para>Opposition senators interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order on my left. Senator Pratt and Senator Watt, your leader is on her feet. Senator Wong, a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Wong</name>
    <name.id>00AOU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My point of order is on direct relevance. I would point out that this question does relate to comments made when the delta variant was already in place in Sydney.</para>
<para>Honourable senators interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order!</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Wong interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Wong, please. It was a very broadly worded question. The minister is entirely in order in answering it in these terms. I am going to ask for silence. I do not want to have to stand or interrupt question time further.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The simple point is that, when the facts and the evidence change, we have been willing to change with the facts and the changes in evidence, and those opposite would be the first to criticise us if we didn't.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Climate Change, Energy</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATERSON</name>
    <name.id>144138</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction, Senator Seselja. Can the minister update the Senate on how the Liberal and National government is delivering a 'technology not taxes' approach to reduce Australia's carbon emissions while also securing our energy needs and making electricity more affordable?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SESELJA</name>
    <name.id>HZE</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Our government is absolutely committed to a technology-led approach to reducing emissions and securing affordable and reliable energy for Australian households and business. We know that those opposite believe that taxes are always the answer, but we don't agree. We have a different approach, and I'm pleased to advise the Senate that our approach is working.</para>
<para>An honourable senator interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SESELJA</name>
    <name.id>HZE</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm hearing from George again. It's hard to hear him, though, through the mask, so I'll do my best to push on. Australia's emissions are now lower than in any year under the previous Labor government. They are at the lowest level since 1990. We've reduced emissions by 20 per cent on 2005 levels, and we're on track to meet and beat our 2030 commitments. Emissions in the NEM have fallen to their lowest level since records began, and our 'technology not taxes' approach saw a record seven gigs of new renewable capacity installed last year alone. Australia now has the highest total amount of solar PV capacity per person in the world. Of course, we still have no idea what Labor's 2030 emissions target is; we just know that, whatever the problem, taxes are always Labor's solution. It is in their DNA.</para>
<para>On this side, we understand that, to continue to drive down emissions while securing our economy from the COVID-19 pandemic, we need to tap into the expertise of agencies that we already have, such as ARENA, to support Australian innovation. That's why we introduced updated ARENA regulations after the Labor-Greens coalition voted against investment in clean and low-emissions technology. We will enable ARENA to invest in the five priority low-emissions technologies identified in the <inline font-style="italic">Technology investment roadmap</inline>: clean hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, long-duration storage, green steel and aluminium, and healthy soils. These, and the 1,400 jobs that would come with them, are all things, it seems, that the Labor Party and the Greens are against. We have a very different approach, and it is in stark display— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Paterson, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATERSON</name>
    <name.id>144138</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can the minister update the Senate on why it is so critical for Australian businesses and households that we pursue a 'technology not taxes' approach when it comes to meeting Australia's energy needs.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SESELJA</name>
    <name.id>HZE</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We know that it's technology and not taxes that will drive down emissions while at the same time creating jobs and ensuring we have the affordable, reliable energy we need. That's why we've introduced these new ARENA regulations, which will enable more investment in the technologies that have been identified in the investment road map. They are the technologies we need to ensure reliable and dispatchable power, yet Labor and the Greens want to block these investments in clean energy technology and the jobs they create. It's hard to comprehend, but it is happening. So perhaps it's time for the Leader of the Opposition, instead of sneaking into coalmines in Queensland, to take the advice of the member for Hunter, who last week said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Labor should just back whatever the government puts on the table. To do otherwise is to suggest we are not genuinely committed to action on climate change …</para></quote>
<para>The member for Hunter is right and the Leader of the Opposition is wrong. Labor doesn't support technology, because they simply want more— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Paterson, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATERSON</name>
    <name.id>144138</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can the minister outline what measures the government is carrying out to deliver affordable, reliable and secure energy, and is he aware of any risks to this approach?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SESELJA</name>
    <name.id>HZE</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are serious risks to our 'technology not taxes' plan to deliver more affordable and reliable energy for all Australians while, at the same time, reducing emissions, and most of them are over there on the other side of the chamber. By teaming up with the Greens to block ARENA's expansion, Labor is saying no to investment in the same low-emissions technologies they claim to support. They voted for higher emissions, fewer jobs and less funding for ARENA, and apparently will do so again unless common sense prevails. The Labor Party don't know where they stand on technology, but we all know exactly where they stand on taxes. Taxes are Labor's track record.</para>
<para>Of course, the member for McMahon, when he was in government, increased the carbon tax. It wasn't high enough. He increased it. We all remember his housing tax, his car tax and his retiree tax. The choice is clear: there are only two ways to reduce emissions, and if it isn't technology it's taxes.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forestry</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture and Northern Australia, Senator McKenzie. In September 2018 the government launched the National Forest Industries Plan—a commitment to Australia's timber industry and an investment in Australia's future. It included a commitment to plant a billion new plantation trees. Minister Littleproud said, 'Australia will have to plant a billion new trees over the next decade to meet demands in 2050, particularly sawlogs for building and construction.' Is there an implementation program for this plan? How many of the billion trees were supposed to have been planted by 30 June this year and how many have actually been planted?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the senator for his question and for the notice he gave that allowed me to get the most up-to-date advice on this topic—and I thank Senator Duniam for that advice. The forestry industry is vital. I am from a timber town, Marysville, in Victoria. The forestry industry underpins the lives and livelihoods of so many Australians. Whether it is in my own home state of Australia; the green triangle in the senator's home state of South Australia, along the western border; the South West Slopes of New South Wales; or the fantastic timber industry of Tasmania, forest products are an integral part of so many rural economies. After all, timber is the ultimate renewable resource—beautiful, natural, strong and replantable. Nothing surpasses it. It is also to the benefit of the environment in regard to carbon sequestration.</para>
<para>The Liberal-National government is committed to working with landholders, businesses, state and territory governments and industry to grow the forestry industry and the Australian plantation estate. Unlike those on the other side, except perhaps for Senator Ciccone, we absolutely want to grow this industry, grow the number of people it employs and grow what we believe is a renewable and sustainable industry for us that is also good for the environment. We'll always listen to their views, and that's why we partner with them. It's important that we acknowledge the issues we face. Timber supply shortages are affecting countries worldwide, and Australia is no exception—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, Senator McKenzie. I have Senator Patrick on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Patrick</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On relevance. I asked for the number of trees that were supposed to have been planted and the number of trees that have actually been planted.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They were points at the end of a question with a preamble. I'll listen carefully to the minister. You have reminded the minister of that part of the question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We were speaking about timber supply shortages. The senator mentioned how vital timber is for construction. I travel around rural and regional Australia, and timber shortages are becoming an impediment for housing construction in some of those regional communities. We're no exception; there's a worldwide shortage of timber. These issues stem from an increase in demand for timber construction— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Patrick, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Minister, I'm very surprised that you don't know the answer to this. You were given notice of the question. It is only 2,800 hectares—that is, about 2.8 million trees have been planted. That is less than one per cent of the target. What's the issue? What's the plan to move ahead? Why are you not coming anywhere near the objective of this plan—a billion trees?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's also important to note that our forestry estates are managed by state and territory governments. The Commonwealth does not manage a single tree in any productive forest. We're working very, very hard, as I said, with state and territory governments and with industry to expand our forestry estate. I understand from the most recent reports that, in Tasmania, the softwood estate expanded by 2,000 hectares and there is an average of 1,100 trees per hectare. That equates to an expansion of approximately 2.2 million trees. In addition, I've been advised that there are currently two contractors working on over 900 hectares of plantation, meaning that almost another million trees are going into the ground. In New South Wales, where the bushfires were most significant, over 100,000 hectares, which equates to over 100 million trees, were lost during those fires. Last year 4½ thousand hectares were planted, and another 7,000 hectares are currently being— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Patrick, a final supplementary question?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Minister, you mentioned the shortage of log in your answer. Is it not in Australia's interest to prohibit the export of trees in circumstances where our own mills are desperate to get log? Is that something that is being considered by the government?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>You're right. Demand is high, supply is restrained for a whole raft of reasons, one of them being bushfires, another being logging bans in certain jurisdictions of certain areas. But, as a federal government, we'll always work with industry to help them grow, and that includes ensuring that we have as much in-country value-add as possible. That means we'll take our lead from them about what's best for the future. We want to keep timber jobs for the 52,000 Australians already employed in the sector and we want to create more jobs. When you look at export measures to prevent the export of timber, our approach is about expanding the domestic industry's home as quickly as possible in partnership with the states and with industries. You know and I know that that means helping bushfire affected sawmills upgrade and update their processing facilities through the recent $40 million bushfire program, meaning they can do more here in Australia rather than sending those raw products offshore.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Coalition Government</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATT</name>
    <name.id>245759</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Birmingham, and I note the answers Senator Birmingham gave to Senator Hanson-Young's earlier questions. In an episode of Steve Bannon's <inline font-style="italic">War Room</inline> coalition Senator Canavan criticised the public health advice of governments, including his own, stating that, even if they released the full public health advice, it would be a 'dog's breakfast'. Senator Canavan on social media has also repeatedly called to end the lockdowns, as recently as in the last two days. Does Mr Morrison agree with Senator Canavan?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm not sure I've even heard of the podcast that you're speaking of, Senator Watt. But in terms of the remarks, at least as you've characterised them, the answer is no.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Watt, a supplementary question?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATT</name>
    <name.id>245759</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On 18 July coalition Senator Rennick shared and endorsed an article on Facebook challenging the TGA's approval of an unnamed COVID vaccine described as 'an experimental gene therapy vaccine with plummeting efficacy, significant short-term safety signals and unknown long-term side effects'. Does Mr Morrison agree with Senator Rennick, and will the government's code of practice on COVID disinformation apply to its own MPs and senators?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government has complete confidence in the work of the TGA and backs it completely.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Watt, a final supplementary question?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATT</name>
    <name.id>245759</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm glad Senator Birmingham backs the TGA more than he backs his own MPs. Mr George Christensen's Facebook yesterday received the fourth-most interactions of all federal politicians, and he represents a region with one of the lowest vaccination rates in the country, at only 10.2 per cent. Mr Christensen regularly uses his Facebook to undermine the use of lockdowns and restrictions, saying they had actually caused deaths in Australia. How can Australians be expected to do the right thing when Mr Morrison's own members are encouraging them to ignore the Prime Minister's own public health advice?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's no secret that there are some Australians who disagree with lockdowns or certain public policy measures that have been taken.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Rennick interjecting—</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Watt interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, Senator Watt and Senator Rennick!</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>However, it is clear that the government wants as many Australians as possible to get vaccinated. I thank Australians for the fact that they are responding in record numbers to the request to get vaccinated. They are responding in record numbers, with yesterday some 213,947 Australians turning out to have another dose of vaccine administered. Those numbers have driven the total number of vaccine doses administered to more than 12.8 million across Australia. They've got us to the point where some 42 per cent of all eligible Australians over the age of 16 have had their first dose.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Wong, on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Wong</name>
    <name.id>00AOU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Point of order on direct relevance: this goes to Mr Christensen—at what point are you going to actually deal with him?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm not sure if that was a point of order. The last part of the question was a very broad one, and I think the minister has a lot of discretion in answering it and remaining directly relevant. Senator Birmingham is in order. Senator Birmingham.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BIRMINGHAM</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We acknowledge those over-70s, of whom nearly 80 per cent have now received the first dose of vaccine, and we encourage all Australians to follow that lead. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<para class="italic">Senator Watt interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Senator Watt, if you ask a question you should listen to the answer. There were a lot of interjections, and I was struggling to hear Senator Birmingham during that answer.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Wong interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Wong, there is a time for debate. My job is not to judge it but to ensure senators can participate.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Pacific and South-East Asia</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SCARR</name>
    <name.id>282997</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Payne. Can the minister update the Senate on the government's support to the rollout of vaccines to combat COVID-19 in Australia's region, including in the Pacific?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>M56</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank Senator Scarr for his question. Australia is standing strongly with our partners, in the Pacific and in South-East Asia, in their response to COVID-19. We are delivering on the Prime Minister's commitment at the G7 to provide up to 20 million vaccines for our neighbours, including 15 million to the Pacific and Timor-Leste and five million to South-East Asia.</para>
<para>To date, we've delivered over one million vaccine doses to eight countries: Papua New Guinea, Timor Leste, Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Samoa, Tonga and, most recently, Vanuatu. Our contribution of Australian vaccines complements the $623 million we've committed to vaccine access, including end-to-end support for the Pacific and South-East Asia. Our Pacific flights program is sustaining air connectivity to the Pacific and Timor-Leste, ensuring life-saving vaccines and medical equipment are delivered. In Papua New Guinea, our closest neighbour, we're strongly supporting the government's campaign to lift vaccination rates. We're partnering with churches, businesses and NGOs to promote vaccination-positive messages. The ADF is providing vital logistics support to PNG's vaccination campaign in the Torres Strait border region. In Fiji, our regular supply of vaccines, AUSMAT teams, PPE and medical equipment has been vital to assisting our partners in Fiji to address a very difficult delta variant COVID-19 surge.</para>
<para>I've been in regular contact with my counterparts on these matters. I met with Pacific Islands Forum foreign ministers last week. Today I've met with ASEAN foreign ministers and spoken with Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown and Tuvalu foreign minister Simon Kofe. Our assistance through these vital partnerships is genuinely saving lives and genuinely helping to stem very lethal outbreaks.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Scarr, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SCARR</name>
    <name.id>282997</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can the minister advise on the broader support Australia is providing to our region to strengthen health security?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>M56</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia is also investing in our region's health systems—in health governance, in specialist clinical services and in training. Last financial year we provided $228 million for regional health programs in the Pacific. In Papua New Guinea, for example, we're working with local partners to provide high-quality, integrated sexual and reproductive health, family planning and maternal and child health services. We're partnering with New Zealand and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, to build health system capacity to increase routine immunisation coverage. Australia has supported the establishment of a new ASEAN Centre for Public Health Emergencies and Emerging Diseases. That was part of my discussions with ASEAN foreign ministers today, which delayed my attendance in the chamber—for that, my apologies. Our Pacific Medicines Testing Program is a foundational initiative within our Pacific Step-up. It boosts public safety through the testing of the quality and safety of medicines used in the Pacific by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Scarr, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SCARR</name>
    <name.id>282997</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's no need for the minister to apologise for engaging with our ASEAN friends. Can the minister outline Australia's assistance to the region to transition from COVID-19 response to longer-term recovery?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>M56</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's fair to say that our region faces an unprecedented economic shock from COVID-19. The Asian Development Bank has cut its growth forecasts for the Pacific from 1.4 per cent, just in April this year, to 0.3 per cent, so Australia is implementing a $500 million package of new economic development and security measures to support South-East Asia's recovery from COVID-19. We're delivering on our commitment through the Mekong-Australia Partnership and our Partnerships for Infrastructure initiative.</para>
<para>Our Pacific COVID-19 Response Package is providing essential services, flight connectivity and increased social spending. In Fiji, we provided over $83 million in fiscal support last financial year, directly benefiting Fijians impacted by COVID-19. This complements the Fiji government's important Poverty Benefit Scheme and disability allowance for women, children and other vulnerable groups. These initiatives are key to supporting the region's resilience and recovery from COVID-19.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Community Sport Infrastructure Grant Program</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CHISHOLM</name>
    <name.id>39801</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the and , Senator McKenzie. I refer to Senator McKenzie's statements this week defending her oversight of discretionary grants programs. The minister has previously told the Senate, in relation to the Community Sport Infrastructure Grant Program:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Prime Minister did not have a role in authorising projects during the three rounds … and the final decision-maker was me.</para></quote>
<para>Can the minister explain how, on the eve of the last federal election, her approved project list was changed at the request of the Prime Minister's office without her knowledge?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I call Senator McKenzie, without reading out multiple titles.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, you need a PhD to read it as well! Thank you, Senator Chisholm, for your question. I submitted a 6,000-word statement to the Senate inquiry into these matters. Indeed, I appeared, in the once-in-120-year event of the Senate calling one of its own members to appear at a committee to provide answers to your questions, which I did happily because I respect the work of the Senate and the integral role it plays in our democracy.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, Senator McKenzie. I have Senator Wong on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Wong</name>
    <name.id>00AOU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have risen after 32 seconds, and if the minister proceeds to answer the question then obviously my point of order will be withdrawn. I didn't want her to sit down before I made this point of order. I am going to ask you, if the minister uses that excuse to avoid any answer in question time, to take advice from the Clerk and to come back. It is not in order, nor is it consistent with the standing orders, for a minister simply to say, 'I wrote a big statement,' and thereby avoid any further questions.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will take further advice on this. I am always happy to do so and to come back to senators individually or collectively. The question is in order because it refers the minister to a previous statement. That is within the standing order. However, a minister, in my view, can refer to a previous statement in answering that without necessarily detailing what is in that statement. If I have any change to that advice, I will report it to the senators involved individually, or to the chamber if it is of grave interest.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you very much, Mr President. I have never avoided answering those questions in those public forums ad nauseam, so I actually have nothing further to add to my public commentary, including answering that specific question during the Senate inquiry that Senator Chisholm chaired—he had over an hour to ask me any question he liked on that day—in addition to the 6,000-word public statement. So I am very comfortable with the management of that program. I am very comfortable with the exercise of ministerial discretion that saw more projects delivered to Labor seats than if I had not exercised my ministerial discretion. More clubs right around the country were able to avail themselves of a highly popular program that was oversubscribed by a factor of 13. Those programs were helping local clubs to increase physical activity right around the country in a whole raft of sports. I have publicly dealt with this through a whole raft of mechanisms that this chamber avails itself of to provide accountability and transparency to the public on the spending of public moneys. I stand by those public comments, and I have nothing further to add.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Chisholm, a supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CHISHOLM</name>
    <name.id>39801</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister has also told the Senate:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Prime Minister's office was not responsible for altering the attachment to the round 3 brief, because the brief was submitted to Sport Australia, albeit not in a timely manner, from my office …</para></quote>
<para>How can the Senate reconcile the minister's claim that Prime Minister had no role in sports rorts when his office was adding and deleting projects without her knowledge?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Again, these questions have been asked and answered. I refer you to both the statement and the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> on both these accounts.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Chisholm, a final supplementary question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CHISHOLM</name>
    <name.id>39801</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Given the minister yesterday listed a number of grants programs that, in her new roles, she is now the decision-maker for, will she ensure that the Prime Minister's office does not repeat the previous practice of altering the minister's grant decisions?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a raft of grant programs under my authority and discretion, as is appropriate as a minister for the Crown. I will actually undertake my role as a minister for the Crown, as a senator, with personal integrity and intent and ensure that I fulfil my duties in accordance with both the ministerial standards and the way I have conducted myself throughout my career.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Wong, on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Wong</name>
    <name.id>00AOU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question didn't go to this minister's appropriateness, on which we all have very different views; it went to whether or not she was going to ensure the Prime Minister's office did not repeat their previous practice of altering her grant decisions.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You've restated the question. The minister has been talking for 21 seconds. If the minister is limiting her comments—as I believe she is—to her administration of the programs, I can't go to the point of actually directing her how to answer a question. She is being directly relevant. There is an opportunity after question time, I repeat, for debate of questions and answers.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>207825</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again, I take full responsibility for all decisions made as a minister then, and I'll continue to do so.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator Birmingham</name>
    <name.id>H6X</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>53</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Beirut Explosion: Anniversary</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>M56</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—When Australians first heard of the explosion at the port of Beirut, it was an incomprehensible disaster. The mobile phone videos of the sudden explosion, with its massive white shockwave, were truly horrifying. The detonation was so large that it registered on the global detection network of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization. More than 215 people died, more than 7,000 were injured and more than 300,000 were displaced, because their very homes were completely lost. Lebanon has not recovered from its grief, nor from its damage. That day also took the life of an Australian citizen, two-year-old Isaac Oehlers. Today we remember Isaac and we once more offer our deep and sincere condolences to his parents, Sarah and Craig, and their families, in their immeasurable grief.</para>
<para>Australia once more reiterates our strong and unequivocal support for a full, credible and transparent investigation into the explosion and for those responsible to be held to account for acts of omission, commission or corruption. Tonight Australia will participate in the third international conference to support the population of Lebanon, co-hosted by the President of France, His Excellency Emmanuel Macron, and the Secretary-General of the United Nations, His Excellency Antonio Guterres. A year after the explosion, Lebanon is facing a more complex crisis—a slide towards the collapse of Lebanon's political and socioeconomic model. Already, according to the United Nations, 1½ million people can no longer afford their essential needs. Australia fully supports international efforts to assist with the Lebanon Reform, Recovery and Reconstruction Framework, known as 3RF, which aims to help Lebanon achieve three central goals in response to the Beirut port explosion: firstly, a people-centred recovery that returns sustainable livelihoods; secondly, the reconstruction of critical assets and infrastructure; and, thirdly, the implementation of reform to help restore people's trust in government institutions by improving governance and accountability. Australia's assistance package to Lebanon, of $15 million, channelled directly through international organisations and NGOs, has assisted Lebanon's direct needs and contributes to a range of additional imperatives, including supporting displaced Syrians and Palestinians now living in Lebanon.</para>
<para>As we all know, Australia is home to around 230,000 citizens of Lebanese heritage—many of my friends in Sydney are part of this vibrant diaspora—and around 20,000 Australians are living in Lebanon. What happens in Lebanon affects us here too. I know how deeply they felt the tragedy of the explosion. The Lebanese diaspora in Australia of all faiths, including Christian, Muslim, Druze and others has been incredibly generous in its donations to international organisations, NGOs and charities as a way to assist those in Lebanon, and I want to acknowledge this warmly. I have had many conversations with the Lebanese communities in Australia. I'm indebted to their tireless efforts, particularly those of Bishop Antoine Tarabay, his broad parish and his excellent advocacy for reform and accountability in Lebanon. I also wish to acknowledge the ambassador to Lebanon, Her Excellency Rebekah Grindlay, and all her staff, who suffered through the explosion themselves with their families but returned immediately to work, despite what had happened to them and to the city in which they had made their home, to help Australians in need of consular assistance and to work with the Lebanese government and our international partners.</para>
<para>There is a great deal of work ahead for the international community and for the Lebanese people if we are to avoid the tragedy of the Beirut explosion becoming an even greater tragedy for all of Lebanon. Australia will continue to play its part in helping Lebanon with humanitarian assistance, with meaningful reforms, with better governance and with genuine accountability.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WONG</name>
    <name.id>00AOU</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I thank the minister for her positive response to my suggestion we mark this tragic anniversary in the chamber today, and we join with her in the comments she's made. On this day one year ago, Australians were horrified by the images of the Beirut port explosion, an explosion more powerful than the one that destroyed the Chernobyl reactor, killing over 200 people, wounding thousands more and wreaking untold damage across the city of Beirut. Tens of thousands were made homeless, and the city remains scarred by this blast. Its reconstruction has been hampered further by, of course, the COVID pandemic and Lebanon's economic collapse.</para>
<para>The youngest victim of the blast was an Australian, two-year-old Isaac Oehlers. Isaac's mother, Sarah Copland, describes her loving and affectionate son thriving in Beirut, already picking up Arabic and French to the delight of locals. Our thoughts today are with Sarah, her husband Craig and their loved ones as they mourn again their loss. Isaac's portrait is memorialised alongside over 200 victims of the blast in Beirut, and we will not forget them.</para>
<para>The opposition also salutes the vital work of our embassy in Beirut throughout this crisis. Australian embassy staff were themselves injured in this blast. Homes were destroyed and their workplace was damaged, but under the leadership of Ambassador Rebekah Grindlay, they managed to navigate the chaos of the explosion's aftermath to ensure Australians in Beirut were accounted for and help them get to safety. We thank them for their work.</para>
<para>This is a particularly difficult time for Lebanese communities in Australia, many of whom are locked down and unable to come together with friends and family, and of course, they remain unable to travel to their homeland to grieve with their loved ones and to help rebuild what was lost. We know that, as a country, Lebanon has faced difficult times before, and now it has a challenging road ahead to rebuild its city, its economy and the trust of its citizens in their political leaders to be transparent and accountable, and this is what the people of Lebanon demand and deserve.</para>
<para>Regrettably, 12 months on from the blast, the grief and losses felt by the people of Lebanon and Lebanese communities in Australia have been compounded by the fact that those responsible have still not had to answer for their failures. This was a tragedy that should have been avoided, but warnings were not heeded, and Lebanon is still grappling with the consequences of this neglect. The victims of this terrible tragedy are still waiting for justice, and the absence of justice inhibits healing. Sarah Copland is fighting for that justice, for a full investigation into how this tragedy could happen and to ensure it never happens again for the victims of that day and for Isaac. So we reiterate our call on the Australian government to support an independent, impartial and transparent investigation into the explosion. We stand with the people of Lebanon, with Lebanese communities in Australia and with the Oehlers-Copland family in their grief.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—On behalf of the Australian Greens, I join with colleagues in this chamber, a year on from the devastation of the Beirut explosion, to mark that tragic event that took so many lives. One of the largest non-nuclear blasts ever known, it killed more than 200 people, wounded over 7,000 and caused horrific damage to the beautiful and vibrant city of Beirut. The blast was so devastating it was felt in Cyprus, more than 200 kilometres away. The footage from the blast was so shocking to watch. An entire building destroyed, shock waves spreading across the city—I cannot imagine what it was like to experience it directly.</para>
<para>In the aftermath of the destruction, the courage of the survivors was incredible and inspiring. People took to the streets, helping each other among the devastation and the chaos. They shifted rubble, cared for the wounded and did everything they could to look after each other. In the weeks following the blast, volunteers arrived from around the country and further afield, doing what they could wherever they could. We should particularly acknowledge the response of the Australian Lebanese community. Around Australia—even in Melbourne, which was locked down at the time—people responded with compassion and care, showing support for the survivors half a world away.</para>
<para>While the courage of the community has been inspiring, a year later many people are still waiting for much-needed accountability and transparency over what actually went wrong. Our hearts go out to those who are mourning and who have not yet received answers, and we acknowledge the incredible grief and trauma that they feel. We particularly acknowledge the Australian family of two-year-old Isaac Oehlers, the youngest victim of the blast, and that family's ongoing struggle for justice. The Australian Greens support the calls from many people and organisations for an independent investigation conducted by or under the auspices of the United Nations Human Rights Council. The survivors and the victims deserve accountability. They deserve answers about why tonnes of a dangerous explosive chemical were stored unsafely for years. They deserve to know why nobody warned them of the danger. To those survivors who are still grieving, still mourning and still searching for answers: we share your grief at the tragic loss of life and we share your passion for justice and accountability. I thank the Senate.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS</title>
        <page.no>55</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Answers to Questions</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PRATT</name>
    <name.id>I0T</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the Senate take note of the answers given to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.</para></quote>
<para>As the answers—or non-answers, I might say—given by government senators to questions asked by Labor senators today reveal, we have a massive lack of certainty in relation to our path out of COVID. This is not due to scientific uncertainty, as the government has tried to argue in the past. It is due to their lack of transparency and of accountability for the issues our nation confronts.</para>
<para>Only yesterday, or the day before, we heard from the Prime Minister that once we get to an 80 per cent vaccination rate we will have a pathway out of lockdowns and an end to lockdowns. Today we heard that the government is finally prepared to mirror what the Doherty modelling itself shows, which is that, yes, we need higher levels of vaccination, but they are not a pathway out of the uncertainty of lockdowns. Absolutely, we must have a very high vaccination level in order to minimise lockdowns. But, as we have seen from the Doherty modelling, the modelling done by the Burnet Institute and the many previous iterations of coronavirus lockdowns, there is a relationship between locking down and managing the spread of the virus. It's been apparent all along, and yet this government does not seem to want to own up to that at all. Yes, we are in a race to get vaccinated in order to minimise disruption to the Australian community, but that does not guarantee a pathway for us out of lockdowns, particularly at 70 per cent vaccination rates. If we see 70 per cent of the Australian population vaccinated, which we are way off—way, way off—achieving, and we then let COVID rip when it comes into our country, there will be thousands and thousands of deaths. Tragically, there have been deaths in New South Wales in recent days, including the deaths of young people. We know we have to lift the vaccination rate among younger Australians.</para>
<para>We also need to look at the level of vaccination that's taking place regionally. Again, in answers to questions asked by Labor senators today, the government refused to be transparent about vaccination rates at a regional level. How can we have an aspirational target of 70 per cent or 80 per cent and say, 'Yes, once we reach those vaccination rates, it's going to give us clarity about how we manage lockdowns with some efficacy,' when this government refuses to disclose what the vaccination rates actually are in different communities? There is a complete lack of accountability and transparency. This government has given a contract to Accenture for software maintenance and support. They have paid out $6.6 million. We're paying for Commonwealth data. There's a lucrative contract here. And yet this government will not tell us how many Australians are vaccinated, region by region, under its GP vaccination program.</para>
<para>We've got better data from the states, with their mass vaccination programs. You can see from those programs and that transparency that, in Victoria, for example, there are regions like Gippsland that have lower vaccination rates because they're not as close to a large vaccination hub. But what you can also see is that those very same regions have lower access to GPs, and it is therefore more likely that they would have a lower vaccination rate. So here we have this government refusing to— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator VAN</name>
    <name.id>283601</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's great to be able to free-range across all these questions that the Labor senators asked, because again it will give us an opportunity to show just how wrong they are, as always. Where do we start? Let's start with the national plan for the rollout. The government has set out, based on the clearest evidence possible, from one of the most reputable institutions in this country, if not in the world, the Doherty Institute, that we will phase out through this as our vaccinations go forward. It's built on the premise that, if you get vaccinated, we can make lockdowns and border closures and restrictions a thing of the past, or at least reduce them, or restrict them to local areas or to people who aren't vaccinated, for example. So this uniquely Australian plan is based on medical evidence outlined in the Doherty report and on the economic modelling from Treasury.</para>
<para>What seems to have happened on the benches on that side and particularly in Labor states is 'I'll look only at the health advice and ignore any economic advice'. We certainly saw that last year in my home state of Victoria, where 130 days—now a cumulative six months—of lockdown wiped out thousands of businesses. I hear the heartbreak of those people who call me every day to tell me how they lost their business. One of my favourite cafes is around the corner from me in St Kilda. It had a notice up on its door, which my wife sent me a photo of, saying that they just couldn't cope any longer with that last lockdown. It knocked the legs out from under them for the last time. They're not reopening after the lockdown. This is the tragedy that Labor won't see, because they've never met a business that they didn't hate.</para>
<para>This plan gives every Australian a target that as a country we can move towards, and then each state and territory must also reach their own targets. I think the fear in most Australians' minds is that once we've hit these targets—and these targets and this plan were agreed in National Cabinet—are the states actually going to follow them? We saw last year in Victoria that the Andrews government agreed to things in national cabinet and then walked out and did the complete opposite. It was woeful. That's why there's so much devastation in businesses, so many people who are lonely and such high mental ill health rates in Victoria. People are now triggered by the word 'lockdown' in Victoria. We've had five. There are cases there today, and I have no doubt that the chief health officer is whispering in Premier Andrews's ear, 'Why don't we go and do that?'</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Pratt interjecting —</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator VAN</name>
    <name.id>283601</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You want to talk about how many months of things? What about the six months that the Andrews government has locked down Victorians? I'll take the interjections all day, every day, Senator Pratt. Come on. Bring it on. I would love to debate you on this. Are you allowed back into your state without quarantining? I don't think so. So keep up the interjections; I'll take them all the time.</para>
<para>The plan is clear. Phase A is where we are now, and we are seeing lockdowns. Phase B is when we hit 70 per cent of adults, aged 16-plus, fully vaccinated. We're making great progress towards this target, with over a million doses a week going into the arms of Australians, and that rate is growing each week. The stats show very clearly how the time taken for every million doses given to Australians is dropping. I think it was down to six days for every million the last time I looked. We need to keep increasing these vaccination rates. Those opposite have done everything possible to try and stop people having confidence in the vaccine rollout. They haven't got behind AstraZeneca. They're trying to put thought bubbles out about $300 so that people might hesitate and not get it so we don't hit those rates. Our national plan will work, and those opposite need to get behind it and get behind Australians for once.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator MARIELLE SMITH</name>
    <name.id>281603</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I want to comment briefly on the remarks made by Senator Van before me in this debate taking note of questions by Labor senators. He said that Labor have never met a business we don't hate. It's completely absurd and offensive commentary from Senator Van , given that the nature of debate in this chamber today has been about economic support for individuals and economic support for businesses. I know that I personally have been supporting businesses and businessowners through this time who have suffered tremendously because of these lockdowns—not just economically and financially but in terms of their mental health—and are really, really struggling. To suggest that I or other senators in this place hate businesses, when we are currently trying to support them through something extremely tough, and something your government has contributed to, is horrifically offensive and disgusting.</para>
<para>But to the matter at hand, the questions raised by Labor senators in parliament in question time today that we're taking note of: can we just look at the facts? Only 15 per cent of Australians are fully vaccinated. We know that the order of vaccination we need to see to have some kind of road map or plan out of this is well above that. We're talking 70 to 80 per cent—in that frame. We're at 15 per cent. Senator Colbeck couldn't even answer the specific questions that we had around the levels of vaccination in certain parts of Australia and, in particular, vulnerable parts of Australia. He says the rollout's continuing to gather pace. Seriously, mate? Seriously? That's the best you've got? You can't answer specific questions about where we're at in the vaccine rollout when we know we need to get much, much higher. We need to see less back patting from this government, and more arm jabbing. It's ridiculous.</para>
<para>We need to get the vaccine rollout on track. We need jabs in arms. That is our ticket out of these lockdowns, which are causing enormous distress in my home state of South Australia and, of course, enormous distress in New South Wales, where they've been going on for weeks and weeks. And there are weeks and weeks—at least—of lockdown in the future for the people of New South Wales. Who knows what the future holds for Queensland. And we have a government. while this is going on, that just shrug their shoulders and say: 'We'll be right. She'll be right, mate. It'll be okay. We'll get there.' Well, Australians are sick of your complacency. Businesses are sick of your complacency. Australians are sick of your complacency, and they're sick of your blame-shifting. You had two jobs: the vaccine rollout and fixing the mess of quarantine. How are you doing on both of those? Less patting yourself on the back, please, and more jabs in arms. I think that would be a really, really good place to start.</para>
<para>South Australia recently went through a week of lockdown. I know it was only a week, and I acknowledge the states around Australia who are going through or have gone through a lockdown much longer than that. But even one week of lockdown has had tremendously difficult impacts on people in my home state. It impacted their mental health, their wellbeing and their social connectedness. It impacted businesses and unemployment. It impacted people who couldn't work from home and who didn't have a job to go to if their business was shut down, if their workplace was shut down. It impacted the essential workers who went to work every day, at great personal risk to themselves and to their families, to keep our economy moving, to keep us safe, to keep essential services open during a lockdown. Many of these workers aren't vaccinated, many haven't been eligible for a vaccination yet. They're working on our checkouts and in our supermarkets; they're driving our buses and our trains; they're working in essential businesses and essential jobs. They are waiting for this vaccine rollout to ramp up. They're waiting for vaccinations to become available so that they can book in. They're waiting to have their jabs so that they can be safe and protected at work. That's what they're waiting for this Commonwealth government to do. They're two pretty simple things: the vaccination rollout and fixing the mess of hotel quarantine, which contributed to these outbreaks in the first place.</para>
<para>Lockdowns are a necessary tool in combating the Delta variant—I understand and appreciate that, and Australians do too—but we do expect the Commonwealth government to do everything they can with all the policy levers they have available to minimise the impacts of this, to minimise the likelihood of future lockdowns and to minimise the impacts on people living through them and experiencing them. It's not about expecting you to have perfect 20/20 vision in hindsight; it's about expecting you to respond to what's in front of you and to do the best by your fellow Australians, to use every lever in your arsenal to fight this and to make it easier for those Australians doing it tough.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BROCKMAN</name>
    <name.id>30484</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I can't help but start by once again calling out the inane comment from senators opposite—they keep using it—that the Prime Minister and the government only had two jobs. What nonsense is this? It shows a complete lack of understanding, a complete lack of insight into what it actually takes to govern this country—particularly in a pandemic.</para>
<para>We can go through the questions that were asked today, but I'm going to stay on the vaccine rollout because there are some key points that Australians do need to understand about the vaccine rollout—in particular, how the vaccine rollout has ramped up significantly over the past few months. In March of this year, 770,000 vaccines were distributed into people; April, 1.4 million; May, 2.1 million; June, 3.4 million; July, 4.5 million. We are now regularly hitting over a million doses of vaccine administered to Australians each and every week. In the last seven days, it was 1.2 million. The total doses administered so far is 12.5 million. I have that written down here, but I think we are actually up to about 12.8 million as of today. Every Australian who hears those figures knows that the vaccine rollout has ramped up significantly over the past few months to the point where in July, as I said, 4.5 million doses were delivered to Australians across this country.</para>
<para>Do we need to see those rates continue? Absolutely. But those rates will mean that all those Australians who want a vaccine will be able to get one. There have been 12.5 million doses administered and we're up to a million doses a week. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to realise that this will get the job done.</para>
<para>Have there been setbacks? Absolutely. The Prime Minister has been absolutely open about this. I myself was hit with one of the changes of advice from ATAGI. I was booked for my AstraZeneca vaccine. I'm going to reveal my age here, which is a bit sad. I don't like doing that.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Wong interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator BROCKMAN</name>
    <name.id>30484</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I know, but nobody looks at the internet, Senator Wong! I was booked for the AstraZeneca vaccine and then that unfortunately wasn't possible because of the changed ATAGI rule. I was then rebooked for the Pfizer vaccine, which I have now had. In the long run, I will actually be fully vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine before I would have been with the AstraZeneca vaccine due to the different times between the first and second doses of those two options.</para>
<para>They are both very good vaccines. They're very efficacious and offer a lot of protection to the people of Australia. As I have done before, and as I will continue to do, I urge everyone to get vaccinated, particularly my fellow Western Australians. We are sadly a little bit behind on the leaderboard in the rollout. We are a little bit behind in the progress of the vaccination rollout in Western Australia. I would urge all my fellow Western Australian citizens to get their names on those lists and register for their vaccination to enable all of us as we move through the road map over the next few months to have as much protection for ourselves, our loved ones and the communities in which we live as humanly possible.</para>
<para>We also have to remember as we continue this vaccination rollout that the path taken by the Australian government, with the absolute cooperation of the Australian people, has saved a large number of lives. Something like 30,000 lives have been saved by taking the path we have. Obviously it's difficult in the current environment with the outbreak of the delta variant, and we are again facing these challenges. But I know that the Australian people will step up to the mark and do what is required to be done over these next few difficult weeks and months ahead. Above all, I know that they will register and that they are registering for those vaccines that are available.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CICCONE</name>
    <name.id>281503</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] As I speak to you now it's more than 12 months on from the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic in Australia. Millions of Australians are living under lockdown. Just to pick up a remark by Senator Brockman, we are not just a little bit behind; Australia is in fact 36th out of the 38 OECD nations. The government just dismisses that as if somehow we are doing okay, but quite frankly we are not. If it weren't for the opposition and others in the health profession putting pressure on government, we would still be dead last.</para>
<para>In recent weeks citizens right around the country have at some point been confined to their homes in a very drastic attempt to stop the spread of this deadly virus. It pains me to learn just how much these lockdowns have impacted upon the lives of many locals in my community here in Victoria, with families separated and livelihoods lost. But why must it be this way? Why is it that, after more than 12 months, restrictions continue to be a feature of our daily lives?</para>
<para>As we look overseas, it is not hard to identify what at least part of the answer might be. Countries like the United Kingdom, Canada and Israel tower over Australia in the proportion of their populations that have been vaccinated. In these countries, as in many others, a new COVID normal has been allowed to develop, one which is for most part free—free of lockdowns, curfews and other harsh measures, which limit the freedom of the citizenry. There can be no doubt that a key element of our pathway out of this mess is through vaccination. It's very simple. Sufficiently vaccinated Australians will help end the lockdowns, each inflicting billions of dollars of losses on businesses, both big and small. It will help in the border closures, the constantly cancelled holiday plans and help us all get back to work. Australia's lag in vaccination rates is hardly a new phenomenon. They have been lagging since day 1. Whether it's been insufficient supply, hesitation or any other concern in between, more needs to be done.</para>
<para>This week Labor announced another element of its positive alternative plan to help Australia combat and recover from the coronavirus pandemic. It's these incentives that can indeed help play an important role in helping us all to get our vaccination rates where they need to be, and by no means is Labor alone in suggesting such measures. Offering incentives has been an important element of many other country's plans to combat the pandemic in a positive manner. Sadly, those opposite have dismissed such measures out of hand. We are not making excuses for their own failings on vaccinations. Of course, this isn't the first time a coalition has dismissed Labor's positive suggestions out of hand. Do we remember JobKeeper? The measure was credited with saving countless jobs right around the country. Given the victory laps we have seen from the government, one could be forgiven for forgetting that this wasn't even their idea. It's not just that it wasn't their idea; when Labor and those in the union movement first suggested it, those opposite also dismissed it completely out of hand.</para>
<para>My hope is that the government will once again perform the same about-face on this initiative. My hope is that instead of pointing the fingers at others for their own failings that the coalition will see merit in this suggestion from Labor and implement it. If we are about to get where we need to be, it is imperative we get jabs in arms. Any measure that gets us to that point should be entertained. To reject such measures simply because they came from Labor is irresponsible. I call on those in the government to stop the spin and to start getting on with the job of keeping all Australians safe.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Media</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) to a question without notice she asked today relating to the propagation of misinformation concerning COVID-19.</para></quote>
<para>I rise to take note of the answers given to me from Senator Birmingham representing the Prime Minister. These questions were in relation to what the government is doing and what the Prime Minister is doing to stamp out misinformation and lies, COVID lies, that are being spread by some members of his own team. We heard only a few days ago that YouTube has taken the extraordinary step of banning Sky News for a week because, in its view, Sky News breached its standards. It was up to YouTube to insist that facts and truth need to be implemented in Sky News' broadcast rather than the lies, myths and conspiracy theories that are promoted by a number of members who continue to appear on Sky News and who continue to be promoted on that platform.</para>
<para>Here is the question: If this information is dangerous enough to be stopped on the internet then surely it's too dangerous to be on our television screens? We know that Sky News broadcasts on its subscription service but also on free-to-air television as well. So what is the government doing to step in and make sure that this dangerous misinformation, this undermining of our health response to COVID-19—putting people's lives at risk—is not getting a flogging on television?</para>
<para>Where is our media regulator in all of this? The government's own media regulator is sitting on its hands doing nothing about it. And you wonder why. Well, they're taking their lead from the very top, the Prime Minister who's doing nothing to sanction and to call out and to pull into line members on his own bench who have actively been undermining the work of doctors, of nurses, of our emergency service workers, of our essential workers, of the people who day in day out are dealing with the realities of COVID spreading across this nation once again.</para>
<para>As millions of Australians today are in lockdown and millions more living with restrictions—we've got a WA premier who's just called a snap press conference over in the west; we're all holding our breath hoping that that's not bad news, but we all know it probably will be—this country is in a COVID crisis, and, rather than holding whack jobs to account on his own side, the Prime Minister continues to turn a cheek. We've got George Christensen purporting and promoting and pushing COVID lies, undermining the good work of our health officials, undermining any success of the vaccine rollout, and we've got government senators like Senator Rennick doing the same thing.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Please stop the clock. Senator Hanson-Young, I'm going to ask you to withdraw the word that shouldn't be uttered here, specifically when it refers to a member or a senator, and that is the word 'lie'.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Spreading COVID lies—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Hanson-Young, we have traditionally adopted a very strict term on the use of the word 'lies'. It is a very slippery slope. I'm going to ask you to withdraw that. There are other words that can be used to convey the same meaning that we have traditionally not had such a strict approach to.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr President, I will withdraw the word 'lie'.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Senator Hanson-Young.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>However, the point I am making is that conspiracy theories, made-up facts and self-appointed experts—COVID terrorists almost—are undermining the government's own job from within, sabotaging the good work of our health experts. Billions of dollars has been spent out of the government coffers in the last 12 months. Hundreds of billions of dollars has been spent to stop the spread of this virus and to help our community stay safe, and rather than helping we've got members of Morrison's own team undermining and sabotaging.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Hanson-Young, again, I ask people to maintain a level of debate by referring to people by their titles or their names. We don't refer to people simply by their surname in this place.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Morrison is sitting on his hands while members of his own team are running around sabotaging this country's health response, putting at risk the safety of every single Australian. He needs to be a leader and call them out.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>59</page.no>
        <type>BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Days and Hours of Meeting</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That, on Thursday, 5 August 2021, the Senate meet after the ringing of the bells to enable senators to attend the Prime Minister's presentation of the annual report on progress in meeting the 'Closing the Gap' targets in the House of Representatives.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Are there any other notices of motion? There being none, I shall proceed to the placing of business.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>59</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Postponement</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind senators that the question may be put at the request of any senator. There being none, we will move on.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>60</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Community Affairs References Committee</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference</title>
            <page.no>60</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I, and also on behalf of Senator Green, move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the following matter be referred to the Community Affairs References Committee for inquiry and report by last sitting day in March 2022:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The provision of general practitioner (GP) and related primary health services to outer metropolitan, rural and regional Australians, with particular reference to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the current state of outer metropolitan, rural, and regional GPs and related services;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) current state and former Government reforms to outer metropolitan, rural and regional GP services and their impact on GPs, including policies such as:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) the stronger Rural Health Strategy,</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) Distribution Priority Area and the Modified Monash Model (MMM) geographical classification system,</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) GP training reforms, and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) Medicare rebate freeze;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on doctor shortages in outer metropolitan, rural and regional Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) any other related matters impacting outer metropolitan, rural, and regional access to quality health services.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a short statement.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Leave is granted for one minute.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>This government is getting on with delivering primary care for all Australians. Since March 2020 we've invested $6.2 billion into the COVID primary care response. In the most recent budget we invested $1.8 billion to further strengthen primary care. Medicare investment increases each year and bulk-billing numbers are at an historic all-time high. Our Stronger Rural Health Strategy continues to give doctors more opportunities to train and practise in regional, rural and remote Australia, delivering 700 additional GPs and 700 additional nurses to the regions to date.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the motion moved by Senator Urquhart for Senator Green be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The Senate divided. [15:50]<br />(The President—Senator Ryan)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>17</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brown, CL</name>
                  <name>Carr, KJ</name>
                  <name>Chisholm, A</name>
                  <name>Farrell, D</name>
                  <name>Gallagher, KR</name>
                  <name>Hanson-Young, SC</name>
                  <name>Lambie, J</name>
                  <name>Lines, S</name>
                  <name>McKim, NJ</name>
                  <name>O'Neill, D</name>
                  <name>Patrick, RL</name>
                  <name>Pratt, LC</name>
                  <name>Roberts, M</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, AE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Watt, M</name>
                  <name>Whish-Wilson, PS</name>
                  <name>Wong, P</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>12</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Askew, W</name>
                  <name>Cash, MC</name>
                  <name>Duniam, J</name>
                  <name>Hume, J</name>
                  <name>McGrath, J</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, B</name>
                  <name>Payne, MA</name>
                  <name>Rennick, G</name>
                  <name>Reynolds, L</name>
                  <name>Ruston, A</name>
                  <name>Ryan, SM</name>
                  <name>Smith, DA (teller)</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>61</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Sunsetting Review and Other Measures) Bill 2021</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="s1310" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Sunsetting Review and Other Measures) Bill 2021</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>61</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the law relating to counter-terrorism, and for related purposes.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the bill and move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a first time.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>61</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I table the explanatory memorandum relating to the bill and I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">The Australian Government's first priority is to keep our community safe. This Bill provides for the continuation of key counter-terrorism powers that ensure the safety and security of all Australians.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">To this end, and consistent with the recommendations of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS), this Bill extends the declared areas offence for a further three years, until 7 September 2024.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Bill will also ensure that key powers available to the Australian Federal Police will continue to be available. The PJCIS is currently reviewing these powers: the control order regime, the preventative detention order regime, and the emergency stop, search and seizure powers in the Crimes Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It is critical that these powers do not sunset ahead of the PJCIS' review. Accordingly, the Bill will defer sunsetting to 7 December 2022, to ensure that law enforcement continues to have a range of capabilities to respond to the ongoing threat of a terrorist attack in Australia.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">All powers will continue to be subject to robust safeguards and oversight, including by providing for the PJCIS to again review the declared areas offence before their new sunsetting date.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Declared areas</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The declared areas offence in section 119.2 of the Criminal Code is an important part of the Australian Government's efforts to stop the flow of foreign fighters. The offence also mitigates the risk that returning foreign fighters pose to Australians.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Where an area is declared by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, it is an offence to enter, or remain in that area without a legitimate reason. A declared area is a place where terrorist organisations are engaging in hostile activity. There are very few legitimate reasons for entering such an area. The offence recognises this by providing a carefully targeted range of exceptions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Although there are currently no declared areas, these provisions remain a necessary component of our framework in the current threat environment and looking to the future.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Control orders</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Control orders under Division 104 of the Criminal Code are an important tool in preventing a terrorist act and managing the risk posed by persons who continue to present a risk to the community.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The provisions allow the Federal Court or the Federal Circuit Court to impose an order which places tailored obligations, prohibitions and restrictions on an individual. The conditions must be reasonably necessary and reasonably appropriate and adapted to protect the public from a terrorist act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Preventative detention orders</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Preventative detention orders under Division 105 of the Criminal Code are another important tool in preventing an imminent terrorist act. A preventative detention order allows a person to be detained without charge, and can only be used where the AFP reasonably suspects an attack could occur within 14 days, or in the aftermath of a terrorist attack to preserve vital evidence.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Crimes Act powers</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The emergency stop, search and seizure powers in the Crimes Act ensure that police are able to respond consistently and effectively to a terrorist incident or threat.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The powers allow police to request a person's name, address and other details; they allow police to conduct a search for a terrorism related item and to seize such an item; and they allow police to enter premises without a warrant to prevent a serious and imminent threat to a person's life, health or safety.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">These AFP powers have been used sparingly since they were enacted. As at 16 July 2021, 20 control orders have been made since September 2014, when the national terrorism threat level was raised. No preventative detention orders have been made, and no incidents have required the use of the emergency stop, search and seizure powers. Although these powers have not been used to date, this demonstrates that the AFP have been appropriately judicious in exercising these exceptional powers.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Review of Division 105A</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This Bill also extends the reporting date for the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor's (the INSLM's) review of Division 105A of the Criminal Code, which provides for continuing detention orders for high risk terrorist offenders.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The INSLM independently reviews the operation, effectiveness and implications of Australia's counter-terrorism and national security laws, ensuring they contain appropriate protections for individual rights, and remain necessary and proportionate.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Extending the INSLM's reporting deadline to as soon as practicable after 7 December 2021 will enable the INSLM to engage in interstate consultations which were disrupted by COVID-19, and provide a greater body of evidence to review the practical operation of Division 105A.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Concluding remarks</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The measures in this Bill implement the Government's response to the recommendations of the PJCIS recent declared areas review. The PJCIS has carefully examined this offence and recommended that it be continued. I acknowledge and appreciate the PJCIS' ongoing and valuable role in reviewing intelligence and security powers.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I also value the continuing partnership with States and Territories in our shared efforts to protect the Australian community. The amendments to Part 5.3 of the Criminal Code have been approved by a majority of States and Territories, as required by the Intergovernmental Agreement on Counter-Terrorism Laws.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This Bill provides for the continuation of important counter-terrorism powers that ensure the safety and security of all Australians.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">They ensure that Australia's law enforcement agencies continue to be able to manage the evolving national security and threat environment, while protecting individual rights through strong and effective oversight and safeguards.</para></quote>
<para>Ordered that further consideration of the second reading of this bill be adjourned to the first sitting day of the next period of sittings, in accordance with standing order 111.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>62</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Order for the Production of Documents</title>
            <page.no>62</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the request of Senator Siewert, I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Aged Care, by no later than 9.30 am on Thursday, 5 August 2021, the full Doherty Institute modelling, including technical reports, used to inform the vaccination targets announced on 30 July 2021 under the national plan to transition Australia's national COVID-19 response.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a short statement.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Leave is granted for one minute.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As advised by the Leader of the Government in the Senate immediately after question time yesterday, the modelling is published and available on the PM&C website. There are three documents available on that website: <inline font-style="italic">Doherty modelling report for national cabinet 30 July 2021</inline>, <inline font-style="italic">Addendum to Doherty modelling report for national cabinet 30 July 2021</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">Doherty Institute COVID-19 modelling: key findings and implications</inline>—presentation.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>63</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Ensuring Northern Territory Rights Bill 2021</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="s1309" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Ensuring Northern Territory Rights Bill 2021</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>63</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McMAHON</name>
    <name.id>282728</name.id>
    <electorate>Northern Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the <inline font-style="italic">Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978</inline> and repeal the <inline font-style="italic">Euthanasia Laws Act 1997</inline>, and for related purposes.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McMAHON</name>
    <name.id>282728</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the bill and move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a first time.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>63</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McMAHON</name>
    <name.id>282728</name.id>
    <electorate>Northern Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McMAHON</name>
    <name.id>282728</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I table an explanatory memorandum and seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">I have great pleasure in introducing this bill to the Senate as I seek to ensure that Northern Territorians have the same rights as residents of other Australian states. There are three amendments to this bill that will restore the rights of Territorians, and all parts are equal in their importance.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Firstly, this bill will remove limitations that apply to the Northern Territory Parliament pertaining to the acquisition of property. This will align to arrangements already in place for the states and will confer equal powers on the Northern Territory Parliament.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Secondly, in a similar manner, the bill will highlight the current relationship between the <inline font-style="italic">Commonwealth Fair Work Act 2009</inline> and Territory law, and will remove the limitations on the ability of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly to make laws conferring powers in relation to the hearing and determining of employment disputes.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Finally, amendments in this bill will remove laws that limit the ability of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly to legislate for voluntary assisted dying. While this sounds controversial, it must be made absolutely clear that this is not a green light for the legalisation of voluntary assisted dying in the Northern Territory. It simply provides the ability for the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly to make their own laws regarding the practice, should they choose to do so.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Northern Territory was the first place in the world to legalise voluntary assisted dying when a private bill by then Chief Minister Marshall Perron came into effect in 1996. For nine months, voluntary assisted dying was legal in the Northern Territory until federal MP Kevin Andrews put forward a bill, passed by the Commonwealth in 1997, that overrode the right of the Northern Territory to legalise assisted dying. This gave a clear message to Territorians, "You are not equal, and your Parliament cannot make its own laws".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">While Territorians are unable to access voluntary assisted dying, the states of Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania have already passed laws to allow people to pass away with dignity, and to avoid suffering and pain, through voluntary assisted dying. The South Australian Parliament passed the <inline font-style="italic">Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill </inline>on 24 June 2021. The Queensland Parliament had legislation to allow access to voluntary assisted dying introduced on 25 May 2021, and the New South Wales Parliament is expected to debate recently introduced legislation later this year. There is no reason why the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly should not have the same rights to introduce legislation to be considered to legalise voluntary assisted dying, particularly if other states can.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">As previously stated, this bill is not just about voluntary assisted dying. Each amendment is equally important.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Overall, the bill aims to restore the rights of Northern Territorians in line with those held by residents of Australian states across legislation that confers powers on the Commonwealth that the Northern Territory Parliament should be able to govern themselves.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">There is no reason why Territorians should not be treated equally by the Commonwealth, and so I proudly introduce this bill on behalf of all Territorians to obtain equality, fairness and legislative liberties in line with those afforded to residents in other parts of our great nation.</para></quote>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McMAHON</name>
    <name.id>282728</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to continue my remarks later.</para>
<para>Leave granted; debate adjourned.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Withdrawal</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to withdraw general business notice of motion No. 1194 in my name.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Murray-Darling Basin Plan</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Order for the Production of Documents</title>
            <page.no>64</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Water, by no later than 10.30 am on Monday, 9 August 2021, the Government's current plan to achieve the full 450 GL of 'efficiency measures' in the required statutory time frame.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a short statement.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Leave is granted for one minute.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Liberal and National government is committed to working with the states in a bipartisan manner supporting the implementation of the plan through the recovery of water through the $1.33 billion off-farm efficiencies and $234 million for community activity, while ruling out further buybacks that cost jobs and hurt our regional basin communities.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>JobKeeper Payment</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Order for the Production of Documents</title>
            <page.no>64</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That there be laid on the table by the Commissioner of Taxation, by no later than 9.30 am on Thursday, 12 August 2021, the list of all employers with an annual turnover of greater than $10 million that were paid a JobKeeper payment, and the number of employees paid, the total amount paid and any amount returned.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the motion moved by Senator Patrick be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The Senate divided. [16:02]<br />(The President—Senator Ryan)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>17</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brown, CL</name>
                  <name>Carr, KJ</name>
                  <name>Chisholm, A</name>
                  <name>Farrell, D</name>
                  <name>Gallagher, KR</name>
                  <name>Hanson-Young, SC</name>
                  <name>Lambie, J</name>
                  <name>Lines, S</name>
                  <name>McKim, NJ</name>
                  <name>O'Neill, D</name>
                  <name>Patrick, RL</name>
                  <name>Pratt, LC</name>
                  <name>Roberts, M</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, AE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Watt, M</name>
                  <name>Whish-Wilson, PS</name>
                  <name>Wong, P</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>13</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Cash, MC</name>
                  <name>Duniam, J</name>
                  <name>Hume, J</name>
                  <name>McGrath, J</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, B</name>
                  <name>McMahon, S</name>
                  <name>Payne, MA</name>
                  <name>Rennick, G</name>
                  <name>Reynolds, L</name>
                  <name>Ruston, A</name>
                  <name>Ryan, SM</name>
                  <name>Seselja, Z</name>
                  <name>Smith, DA (teller)</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Jakarta Centre for Law Enforcement Cooperation</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Order for the Production of Documents</title>
            <page.no>65</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the request of Senator Rice, I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, by no later than 2 pm on 12 August 2021:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) all records, including invitations, emails, briefings and other documents, held by the Australian Government in relation to the participation of Untung Sangaji in training at the Jakarta Center for Law Enforcement Cooperation (JCLEC);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) all communications between the Australian Federal Police and Untung Sangaji; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) any advice that the Australian Federal Police, the Department of Home Affairs or the Attorney-General's Department have provided to the current or previous ministers about the risks of providing training at JCLEC to individuals who have committed human rights violations.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a short statement.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Leave is granted for one minute.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Jakarta Centre for Law Enforcement Cooperation is an independent Indonesian institution operating under Indonesian law. Individual programs are sponsored by a variety of international partners, including the AFP and other Australian government agencies. This matter has been extensively examined during Senate estimates hearings and, with questions on notice answered in full, the government believes this motion represents only an unnecessary diversion of resources.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a short statement.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Leave is granted for one minute.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor will not be supporting this motion. We will always be a strong advocate for human rights internationally and we remain concerned about ongoing reports of violence in West Papua. All sides must show restraint and engage in genuine dialogue. Labor reaffirms that Australians should not be directly or indirectly involved in perpetuating human rights abuses. There are valid questions to ask about this issue. These are complex foreign and national security matters, and this motion goes beyond what we think is appropriate. Labor will continue to use the appropriate channels, such as estimates and briefings from the government on this matter.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is the motion moved by Senator McKim on behalf of Senator Rice be agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The Senate divided. [16:06]<br />(The President—Senator Ryan)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>5</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Hanson-Young, SC</name>
                  <name>McKim, NJ (teller)</name>
                  <name>Patrick, RL</name>
                  <name>Roberts, M</name>
                  <name>Whish-Wilson, PS</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>26</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brown, CL</name>
                  <name>Canavan, MJ</name>
                  <name>Carr, KJ</name>
                  <name>Cash, MC</name>
                  <name>Chandler, C</name>
                  <name>Chisholm, A</name>
                  <name>Duniam, J</name>
                  <name>Farrell, D</name>
                  <name>Gallagher, KR</name>
                  <name>Hughes, H</name>
                  <name>Hume, J</name>
                  <name>McDonald, S</name>
                  <name>McGrath, J</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, B</name>
                  <name>McMahon, S</name>
                  <name>Payne, MA</name>
                  <name>Rennick, G</name>
                  <name>Reynolds, L</name>
                  <name>Ryan, SM</name>
                  <name>Scarr, P</name>
                  <name>Seselja, Z</name>
                  <name>Small, B</name>
                  <name>Smith, DA</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, AE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Watt, M</name>
                  <name>Wong, P</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Urban Congestion Fund</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Order for the Production of Documents</title>
            <page.no>66</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development, by no later than 10 am on Monday, 9 August 2021, the following documents discussed during a hearing of the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee (the committee) on 19 July 2021:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) any email or document setting out the list of 'top twenty marginal seats' to be 'canvassed' for projects as part of the Urban Congestion Fund (UCF), as referred to by Mr Brian Boyd of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) on page 5 of the Hansard of the committee's hearing on 19 July 2021;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any spreadsheets created by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development for the purpose of setting out proposed UCF projects, as referenced in paragraphs 2.30 to 2.32 of the ANAO's report, <inline font-style="italic">Administration of commuter car park projects within the Urban Congestion Fund</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) any spreadsheets created by, originating in, or shared between the Prime Minister's Office and the offices of the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development or the Minister for Urban Infrastructure, setting out proposed UCF projects, as referenced in paragraphs 2.30 to 2.32 of the ANAO's report, <inline font-style="italic">Administration of commuter car park projects within the Urban Congestion Fund</inline>; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) any maps and attached schedules referred to by Mr Boyd of the ANAO on page 8 of the Hansard of the committee's hearing on 19 July 2021, setting out where projected UCF expenditure would take place and the party affiliation of the seats in which that expenditure would occur.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that notice of motion No. 1201 be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The Senate divided. [16:12]<br />(The President—Senator Ryan)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>14</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brown, CL</name>
                  <name>Carr, KJ</name>
                  <name>Chisholm, A</name>
                  <name>Farrell, D</name>
                  <name>Gallagher, KR</name>
                  <name>Hanson-Young, SC</name>
                  <name>Lambie, J</name>
                  <name>McKim, NJ</name>
                  <name>O'Neill, D</name>
                  <name>Patrick, RL</name>
                  <name>Pratt, LC</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, AE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Watt, M</name>
                  <name>Whish-Wilson, PS</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>13</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Cash, MC</name>
                  <name>Duniam, J</name>
                  <name>Hughes, H</name>
                  <name>McGrath, J</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, B</name>
                  <name>Payne, MA</name>
                  <name>Rennick, G</name>
                  <name>Reynolds, L</name>
                  <name>Roberts, M</name>
                  <name>Ruston, A</name>
                  <name>Ryan, SM</name>
                  <name>Seselja, Z</name>
                  <name>Smith, DA (teller)</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>67</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Improved Grants Reporting) Bill 2021</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="s1311" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Improved Grants Reporting) Bill 2021</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>67</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, and for related purposes.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the bill and move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a first time.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>67</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I table an explanatory memorandum and seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">The Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Improved Grants Reporting) Bill 2021 is being introduced to improve accountability and standards in grants administration.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines, issued under the <inline font-style="italic">Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013</inline>, establish the Commonwealth's grants policy framework and sets out the requirements and expectations for the administration of grants.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">While mainly aimed at Commonwealth departments and agencies, there are some requirements that apply to Ministers. These relate to where Ministers approve grants that have not been recommended by the relevant officials, and where Ministers award grants within their own electorates.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Sub-paragraph 4.12a of the Grants Rules and Guidelines require Ministers to report annually to the Finance Minister on all instances where they have approved grants that relevant officials have recommended be rejected. This report must contain a brief statement of reasons, and is to be provided to the Finance Minister by 31 March each year for the preceding calendar year.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Sub-paragraph 4.12b of the Grants Rules and Guidelines require reporting to the Finance Minister of grants awarded by Ministers within their own electorates.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">While there is public reporting of this information, there is a lag in timing. There is a Senate Order that requires the tabling of all reports and correspondence received by the Finance Minister under paragraph 4.12 of the Grants Rules and Guidelines by no later than 30 April. These reports and correspondence relate to grants awarded in the preceding calendar year (so the Senate Order this year related to grants awarded from 1 January to 31 December 2020).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This bill amends the <inline font-style="italic">Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 </inline>to prescribe the reporting requirements currently found in the Grants Rules and Guidelines in primary legislation and improve the timeliness of those requirements. The bill would require Ministers approving grants against departmental recommendation, or within their own electorates, or grants that did not meet any of the relevant selection criteria to provide reports to the Finance Minister within 30 days of their approval. The Finance Minister would then need to table those reports in the Parliament within 5 sitting days of receiving them.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This would provide an extra layer of accountability and transparency in grants reporting, and make Ministers consider their decisions noting there will be public reporting.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It is another important step in ensuring that governments remain open and accountable to the Parliament, and to the Australian public.</para></quote>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to continue my remarks later.</para>
<para>Leave granted; debate adjourned.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</title>
        <page.no>68</page.no>
        <type>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>F49</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the Senate that at 8.30 am today 12 proposals were received in accordance with standing order 75. The question of which proposal would be submitted to the Senate was determined by lot. As a result, I inform the Senate that the following letter has been received from Senator Wong</para>
<quote><para class="block">Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The failure of the Prime Minister to deliver a speedy effective rollout of COVID-19 vaccines and safe national quarantine, meaning 10 million Australians begin the week, yet again, languishing in lockdown.</para></quote>
<para>Is the proposal supported?</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—</inline></para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>F49</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers for today's discussion. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clocks accordingly.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GALLAGHER</name>
    <name.id>ING</name.id>
    <electorate>Australian Capital Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the opportunity to speak today in the chamber about the Morrison government's failure to deliver effective vaccine rollout and safe national quarantine, meaning that we have millions of Australians—10 million Australians—who are currently living in lockdown situations.</para>
<para>I think it's worth going back and having a look at what happened right from the beginning of the vaccine rollout to answer the question: why has it been such a shambles, why has there been so much confusion in the public messaging, and why has every target or commitment given by this government failed to be achieved or reached? It starts right back at the beginning of the announcements about the vaccine procurement strategy. At the beginning of November, the Prime Minister told all of Australia, 'Australia is at the front of the queue.' That is where the misinformation and the commitments given but never reached started. This was the day that the Prime Minister announced a deal for 10 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine and 40 million from Novavax, saying that Australia was at the front of the queue for the mRNA vaccines. Of course, now one of the issues with our low vaccination rate is the failure to have adequate supply of the Pfizer vaccine. We know that the claim that we were at the front of the queue was simply not true.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister also said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We aren't putting all our eggs in one basket and we will continue to pursue further vaccines should our medical experts recommend them.</para></quote>
<para>Again, either the experts failed to provide the government with the advice that was actually needed by this country or the Prime Minister chose to have a very reduced number of deals. When you look around at other countries, they were signing up to five, six or seven deals. The Australian government made an absolutely clear decision not to do that.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister then committed to having four million Australians vaccinated by the end of March. He made this commitment in January 2021. Of course, we all know now that this was never reached either. On 31 January the health minister, Greg Hunt, said, 'Australia will be fully vaccinated by October.' He stated, 'We aim to have the country, 20 million adults, vaccinated before the end of October.' We now know of course that that won't happen either. On 1 February 2021, the Prime Minister made another promise—that all Australians who wanted a vaccine would be vaccinated by October. But, just a few days later, the failure to deliver on commitments started. On 5 February, the health secretary, Professor Murphy, said, 'It's more realistic that Australia will hit the four million vaccinated mark by early April rather than mid-March. Just a few weeks after the Prime Minister had given that commitment the government were accepting that they weren't going to meet it.</para>
<para>On 15 February the Prime Minister set a new target of 60,000 doses for February instead of the 80,000 he promised in January. On 16 February the health minister announced that the aged-care vaccination rollout would take approximately six weeks. Remember that? It's still not done. That was on 16 February and here we are in August and we know there are still aged-care residents to be vaccinated with their second dose and we know that the aged-care workforce, the ones that are actually bringing the virus into aged-care residential settings, haven't been vaccinated. We learnt just a couple of weeks ago that nobody actually knows what's happening with the home-care workforce because there isn't a plan. A decision was taken to not really pursue the home-care workforce because the government were too wound up with how they were failing to meet the residential aged-care vaccination target.</para>
<para>On 28 February this year, on the government's target of 60,000 doses by the end of February, we found out that only about half of those had been administered. So right from the get-go every target set by this government has failed. Then on 11 March, just a month after the Prime Minister said, 'Everyone who wants to be vaccinated will be fully vaccinated by October,' Professor Murphy belled the cat and said, 'We don't know whether we will be able to achieve two shots by the end of October.' On 31 March, the day that we were meant to hit the target of four million vaccinations, the Prime Minister failed to meet the target he set himself by 3.4 million vaccinations. Where he promised four million, he delivered 600,000. A week later—what a surprise!—there was a rollout recalibration. The Prime Minister announced that, after ATAGI advice, Pfizer would now be the preferred vaccine for under-50s and—what a surprise!—there wasn't enough. We had a shortage of supply because we failed to secure a deal with Pfizer that allowed for this sort of redundancy.</para>
<para>On 11 April the commitment to have all aged-care residents and workers and disability care residents fully vaccinated by Easter failed. That went. A few months later, we found out that a decision had been taken to take disability residents out of that target because the government were prioritising aged-care residents. They didn't meet that target anyway. Nobody told people working in the disability sector or people living with a disability themselves that that decision had been taken.</para>
<para>On 12 April the Prime Minister released a video statement where he announced that Australia no longer had vaccination targets. What a surprise that was considering the targets the government had set themselves had been missed! We got promised 13 pop-up vaccine clinics in New South Wales that would be open by the end of May to get aged care and disability care services done. But by July just three were listed on the Department of Health website.</para>
<para>The vaccination target of six million vaccinated by May was failed. Then, on 11 May, the Treasurer stated in his budget speech, 'Every Australian who would like to get two shots of the vaccine will be able to do so by the end of the year.' We know that didn't last a day before the Prime Minister overruled the Treasurer and made it clear that it's actually not government policy any longer to have a commitment that Australians will have access to two doses by the end of the year. Now the target had moved to, 'Well, we'll just hope that you'll have one dose or you'll be offered a vaccine by October.' The Prime Minister said, 'These aren't our assumptions any longer; they are not the policy settings.' On 28 May, Australia reached 3.9 million vaccinations, two months behind the original schedule, which predicted four million doses by the end of March. As to the 13 pop-up clinics that were promised, at the end of May there were still only three of them.</para>
<para>In June, the aged-care minister acknowledged that he didn't know how many people in the aged-care workforce had been vaccinated. Health officials said only 10 per cent of the workforce had been reached through in-house vaccination programs and at least 20 aged-care facilities were to be visited as part of the aged-care residents vaccination rollout. This was in June. The vaccination rollout started in February, and aged-care residents, disability residents and the workers in those areas were 1a. They were meant to be done in the first six weeks.</para>
<para>On 19 June we got a new term, 'horizons'. That was to replace the word 'targets', we think. We haven't had an ad campaign. We've had strategies, we've had plans, we've had horizons, we've had targets and now we've got a campaign plan being launched. It seems every time something goes wrong with the vaccine rollout another document comes out. There are more phases—1a, 1b, 2a and 2b, which are now phases A, B and C. And now we have the Doherty modelling announcing different arrangements that are being put in place. Is it any wonder people are confused about what's going on? There hasn't been an ad campaign to target people around the vaccination, because we haven't had enough supply, because we didn't have enough deals. Decisions taken last year have turned out to fail the Australian people in terms of getting an efficient rollout, getting it done properly and making sure we're protecting vulnerable people. None of that, which should have guided the strategy, has actually been achieved today, some six months after the rollout started.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DAVEY</name>
    <name.id>281697</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's all well and good to be very negative in what is a negative and a very trying and difficult time. It's all well and good to, with hindsight, say that we should have had multiple vaccine deals with multiple vaccine companies which had not even put in an application to have their vaccinations approved for use in Australia yet. It's all well and good to say that the Prime Minister has failed, but that is a very harsh judgement.</para>
<para>Our government, under the Prime Minister, has spent the last 561 days working day and night with the health experts and listening to the health advice to try and deal with this pandemic. We were one of the first nations in the world to actually notify that the virus had human pandemic potential. That was in January 2020, at the same time as we were dealing with devastating bushfires and trying very hard to keep our country and our morale up. We were already listening to the health experts. We were already watching this pandemic, and we have continued to work with the health experts ever since. We have worked hard, and our efforts, which initially had the full support of the Labor Party, are estimated to have saved over 30,000 lives. We've supported over three million Australians through JobKeeper, while keeping Australia's economy on track, with over one million Australians getting back to work. We have invested more than $370 million—that is $659,000 per day since the pandemic began—in support for COVID-19 research and development. As at the start of August, we've now got 5,000 GP practices playing a crucial role in administering the COVID vaccination rollout.</para>
<para>Yes, I accept Senator Gallagher's accurate reflection that we missed the target. We didn't have four million people vaccinated by April; that is right. The Prime Minister has acknowledged this and he has publicly apologised for missing the mark. But we have turned that around. We had met the four-million mark by mid-June. We are now vaccinating a million people a day and, just in the last 28 days, we have administered over four million doses, so we are now doing four million doses a month, which has really turned it around. We also have our community pharmacies on board to deliver vaccinations. I also want to acknowledge the work of the Royal Flying Doctor Service, who have been out and about in our most regional and remote communities and have administered 9,200 vaccine doses across 88 remote communities, including remote Indigenous communities.</para>
<para>I also want to mention the important work our government is doing to support other countries in the South Pacific, which are being crucified by this pandemic. Over 153 million doses have been distributed around the world to 137 countries, and we have helped our neighbours and friends in Papua New Guinea, Timor Leste, Fiji and the Solomon Islands get their hands on crucial doses to help their populations because we don't turn our backs on our neighbours.</para>
<para>This pandemic is immeasurable, but this motion goes to show how out of touch Labor is with the everyday Australians. There is so much health advice coming out from those opposite that doesn't necessarily reflect the advice that the experts are giving us. Australians know that our government is behind them. We are working our hardest to ensure that we get through COVID and that our economy is in a position to be able to recover and respond.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McALLISTER</name>
    <name.id>121628</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Millions of Australians across the country are now in a COVID lockdown because the Prime Minister has bungled the two most important jobs this year—rolling out the vaccine and fixing the nation's quarantine system. Let's be very clear about what is happening. Lockdowns are still happening because the Prime Minister didn't treat the rollout as a race; it was always a race. The rollout remains the most important job the government has and they need to use every option that they have to speed it up because it is not going well. In the rollout race, Australia is coming 84th in the world. As Malcolm Turnbull recently pointed out, 'It is a colossal failure.' He went on to say it is 'the biggest failure of public administration' that he can recall. It costs a lot, an estimated $300 million a day. The economy is bleeding hundreds of millions of dollars a day and billions each week because Mr Morrison has not done his job, and it's a price being paid by Australian workers and by Australian small businesses for his incompetence.</para>
<para>I remember really well how difficult things were for Chinese Australian businesses, particularly the restaurants, at the beginning of the pandemic. At that time, I spoke with Chinese Australian representatives in Burwood and in Hurstville about the challenges that they were facing at a time of real uncertainty and fear but also of rising racism—let's be honest. I've kept track of how these communities and these businesses are going, and there was a story the other day about the restaurateur Vivien Chen, who runs Yang's Dumpling Restaurant in Burwood. She talked in the story about just how devastating it is to be back in lockdown in 2021. She pulled her business through the challenges in 2020, but this time it's really tough. The story quoted her:</para>
<quote><para class="block">"This lockdown is proving very, very hard for us," said Ms Chen … "Our business is more than 75 per cent down compared to this time last year, and it's really bad now; there are virtually no customers.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"Yesterday, I made $200, which isn't even enough to cover my employee costs. And I really want to keep my staff because, if they go, I won't have staff anymore when this lockdown finished."</para></quote>
<para>She said that many of her friends had already closed their businesses. They struggled during the previous lockdown, and this one is proving to be the last straw. She said that they couldn't manage with the opening and then closing, opening and then closing, so they've given up and closed permanently. It's these small businesses and the workers that they employ that are bearing the brunt of these lockdowns, and we owe it to them to fix up the rollout and fix up the quarantine.</para>
<para>Of course, it's possible to quantify the economic impact with a number, but we don't live in an economy; we live in a society, and, although it's more difficult to quantify the impact of the lockdown on the bonds between us, it doesn't make that impact any less real. In Sydney it seems likely that children will go for months without having a lesson in a classroom or being able to play with their friends. People won't be able to meet their newborn nieces and nephews, and older Australians are increasingly isolated without contact with their loved ones. And we've lost the ability to do simple things like have a conversation with our neighbours. Our communities really are the sum of these genuine, sometimes casual, human interactions, and technologies like Zoom and Skype really don't substitute for them.</para>
<para>None of this is an argument against lockdowns. Public health officials are rightly telling us that short and sharp lockdowns are amongst the best tools that we have right now to avoid a devastating spread of the Delta variant. But all of this is an argument for having fought tooth and nail previously, back when we had the space and the time, to put in place the conditions that would have allowed us to avoid this. Every dollar that the Prime Minister saved by not ordering more, and a more diverse range of, vaccines back in 2020 is looking very expensive indeed. And every excuse that he provided for his refusal to establish a national quarantine facility looks very foolish indeed.</para>
<para>Has there been any real reckoning with any of this, any sincere examination of performance? Not really. There is a continuing insistence that everything is going quite well. There has been little regret, much less sincere apology. Indeed there has been deflection, blame shifting, to the point where it's surely getting a little embarrassing for the Prime Minister's own team. It's always someone else's fault—headline after headline, press conference after press conference. It's not his fault. It's ATAGI. It's the Italians. It's the aged-care workers who didn't get themselves organised. It's somebody else's fault, but it's never his.</para>
<para>This week, in a new low, the coalition is, bizarrely, trying to assert that it's the opposition's fault. This is fanciful and just a little desperate, right? Labor has always supported the health advice 100 per cent. We support it about lockdowns. We support it about Pfizer. We support it about AstraZeneca. Any suggestion to the contrary is total nonsense. And, unlike the Prime Minister, we have never sought to undermine the health advice, never attacked ATAGI and never sought to influence their advice through waging some sort of public campaign.</para>
<para>My leader, Mr Albanese, and our entire federal Labor team have supported the science and supported the evidence around the pandemic. That is a position that really can be distinguished from the behaviour of the Prime Minister and the people around him, especially that group of backbenchers who have sought to gain political advantage by microtargeting messages to the antilockdown crowd and the antivaccine crowd.</para>
<para>This, oddly enough, is a government that seems determined to behave like an opposition. It really is quite that strange. They would rather point the finger and complain about external circumstances than actually take responsibility for delivering and for leading, because what you need, what we need, right now as a community is actual leadership. We need real leaders willing to step up and accept the heavy burden of leadership at a really difficult time. We need leaders to take decisions in the national interest. Australia is facing the biggest health crisis in a century, and if Mr Morrison and his team do not want the job of governing under those circumstances they really should get out of the way.</para>
<para>Labor does have a plan to beat COVID-19, to support our community through this pandemic, and it starts with treating the rollout like a race. We would bring the necessary urgency to this task if we were governing. We would work to increase supply by talking closely with the vaccine companies and with our allies. We would vaccinate frontline workers by bringing the vaccine to them rather than putting the burden on them to organise their own arrangements. We certainly wouldn't blame them, like the Morrison government has. And we would build the capability to start manufacturing vaccines here. We recognise what is required to lead, and we recognise the imperative for leadership at this time. The Morrison government's failures have left millions of people in very, very difficult circumstances, and it is time that instead of deflecting blame and saying that it is someone else's fault that they stood up and took responsibility for leading at this most difficult time. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SIEWERT</name>
    <name.id>e5z</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] The Greens are supporting this MPI about the failure of the Prime Minister to deliver a speedy effective rollout of COVID-19 vaccines and safe national quarantine. This failure means 10 million Australians begin the week yet again languishing in lockdown. When it comes to getting out of COVID the government had a number of key tasks. Vaccines and quarantine were key, yet the Morrison government failed to secure enough vaccine or enough diversity of vaccines, they failed to provide clear messaging and advice, and they failed to provide us with an evidence based pathway out of this mess.</para>
<para>I welcome the release of the modelling from the Doherty Institute that was used to inform the government's national plan to reopen Australia, but this only prompts more questions. For example, why weren't the Doherty Institute asked to model the impact of reopening our borders? Under phase C of the government's plan, caps on returned Australians would be abolished and international travel restrictions would be lifted. So many Australians have felt the heartbreak impact of border closures. For many people life is on hold until our borders are open once more. Everyone deserves to know when the government is planning on reopening borders and the associated risks involved. It's a huge shortcoming, and I'm disappointed the government hasn't asked for this information. So many Australians are hanging out to see relatives and their loved ones, and so many Australians are hanging out to come home.</para>
<para>The Doherty Institute also looked at what would happen if we had partial or optimal effectiveness of testing, tracing, isolation and quarantine. We do not have optimal contact tracing and quarantine arrangements in Australia. This is abundantly clear from the 27 breaches of hotel quarantine which have sent us into so many lockdowns. If our contact tracing and quarantine continue to be only partially effective, the Doherty Institute predicts we will still continue to need lockdowns for 18 to 22 per cent of the time once 70 per cent of the population is vaccinated.</para>
<para>The government is gambling with our future by refusing to include children in its vaccination targets. Again, the Doherty Institute thinks that vaccinating children would only achieve modest reduction in transmission, yet we know that children aged zero to 19 account for more COVID cases in Australia than people aged 70 and over. Children can catch and transmit COVID, which has been evident throughout the current outbreaks in Queensland. Children can also catch COVID from their vaccinated parents. This is another reason why we need to understand exactly what the government asked the Doherty Institute to model. That is very unclear. While the government is making critical decisions about our way out of COVID, private consulting companies are continuing to make huge profits, yet we still have had significant troubles and mistakes made through the vaccine rollout. We have no idea about the qualities of the strategic planning they're supposed to have given and the advice and case studies they're supposed to have given, or whether they were even used in decision-making. These are all confidential reports.</para>
<para>On a personal note, I encourage people to get vaccinated. My mother and I have now had our second dose. We got vaccinated together, both being in phase 1b. Please, I urge Australians to get vaccinated. We need the government to come clean about what their targets are and when we will be able to open our borders. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'SULLIVAN</name>
    <name.id>283585</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I've made a habit of thanking the opposition for the opportunity to speak on matters of public importance that they bring before this chamber, and this opportunity is no different. When they're writing them they must think that the wording is clever, they'll get a few runs on the board and somehow they'll embarrass the government. But in reality what they do is they expose themselves. They give us the opportunity, time after time, to come in here and talk about their lack of policy and how they've managed to go through this whole pandemic without making a single meaningful contribution to the public debate. They've come up with really clever campaign slogans about how we have two jobs, and that's much the same in how this MPI is worded. They've put a lot of time into developing that little campaign. Just think about how they've been writing all those talking points, getting them out to all the MPs and putting them on social media so that they can churn them out to anyone who will listen. They've taken months of preparation, months of saying the same thing over and over again because they're trying to get their message into people's minds. And this week they've managed to unwind it all. One policy announcement, and all of that effort has been wasted.</para>
<para>The Leader of the Opposition fronted the media and came out with his grand plan to get Australians vaccinated. 'Give them cash,' he said, '$300 to anyone, everyone, who gets the jab.' Firstly, it's a massive insult to the intelligence of Australians, and that's a whole debate to have in and of itself. But most significantly, by making this announcement Labor have finally come to the party and backed our vaccine plan. They've finally admitted that we actually are in a position to get between 70 per cent and 80 per cent of Australians vaccinated by Christmas, otherwise they wouldn't be out there saying that we should be giving them $300. They have confirmed what we on this side already know, and that is that we have the supply of vaccines for every Australian who wants one to have one by Christmas. And just like that they've undermined months—months—of their own scare campaigns.</para>
<para>Why are they advocating for the $300? It's true there are many in our community that do have some reluctance to get vaccinated. There's a lot of misinformation flowing about the vaccine strategy, and I must say that those opposite are actually doing little to deal with it, just like what they did with JobKeeper. They had to fight it every single step of the way. They had to try to undermine it, and when it wound down they were saying that it was going to cause mass unemployment. They said that the economic apocalypse would come. They claimed that it would come, but it never came. In fact, it was quite the opposite: we had the lowest unemployment rate in 10 years. Did we hear any retraction? Did we hear any admission that their predictions did not come true? Sadly, no.</para>
<para>I wonder if I can be surprised by those opposite. When we get to Christmas and we've achieved those targets set by the Prime Minister, which I know Australians will step up to, will those opposite acknowledge that their gloomy predictions were wrong? Will they bring themselves to the Senate for an hour, like we are doing with this MPI, and acknowledge that they got it wrong and celebrate Australia's success? Or will they yet again bring to the Senate some political pointscoring? With every policy response we've put in place to deal with the economic and health consequences of this pandemic, they've said it goes too far or doesn't go far enough, that it's too big or too small. You name it, they've brought up every single argument they can to undermine it. Yet here we are, having been able to deal with the response of the pandemic like no other nation in the world. You wouldn't want to be anywhere else.</para>
<para>This vaccine rollout will be no different. Already, more than 12.5 million doses have been administered. We are now hitting well over one million doses every week, or over 200,000 per week day. A total of 4.5 million vaccinations were given in July—more than double the number achieved in May, when 2.1 million doses were administered. Sure, there've been issues of supply. We've resolved those issues. The Prime Minister, working with his leadership, has dealt with those problems. Not all the calls we've made have gone out as we had hoped, but we've turned the corner.</para>
<para>Every time a news campaign hits the airwaves, particularly in relation to the vaccine rollout, where we have hesitancy in the community, more and more people second-guess the efficacy of the program. They are doing nothing to underscore the efficacy of the program; they are undermining it every step of the way. They are turning what should be a medical conversation into a political one. That should never be the case. We're seeing it here with the substance of this MPI, and it's absolutely despicable. There have been setbacks—of course there have. Never before has a nation had to deal with a rollout on the scale we're dealing with right now. This is what Australian families are dealing with.</para>
<para>Unlike those opposite, we are capable of wearing those setbacks. We are capable of owning them, correcting them and, importantly, moving on. The Prime Minister has done that, and we are on the home stretch. The next six months will be the definitive moment in our response. Every nation is racing to get people vaccinated. The world is opening up again. They won't be waiting for Australia, but we'll be ready for when that happens. We'll be ready because we are on track. We have an achievable time frame with the rate of vaccination that is occurring right now. With the pipeline of vaccines available, we know we can do it. We have fantastic health staff—GPs and pharmacists—and infrastructure in place to get the job done. We know Australians will step up. Australians are rolling up their sleeves and having that jab. This is a massive national effort unlike anything we have ever seen. That's a phrase that you hear often, but it's absolutely true. It requires everyone to get on board to either have the vaccine or to have conversations in the community with those who have concerns. And that's why I say it's a great national effort.</para>
<para>Labor needs to join the team. Labor needs to get in behind Australia, not seek to undermine it for political points. I know many of the senators on that side of the chamber. They are good people, and they are better than these cheap campaigns.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Farrell interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'SULLIVAN</name>
    <name.id>283585</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There's a few, Senator Farrell. This isn't the time for cheap political points. We're coming up to an election soon, and there will be plenty of time for that during the election campaign. Between now and Christmas, this is about getting behind Australians, supporting those who need to go and get the vaccine—and supporting those who have got some hesitancy; we understand that. Now's the time to join us. Now's the time to join Australians as they make the decision to come forward and get vaccinated. Every day that you try to make vaccines political, you make those last few percentage points of people who haven't got the vaccine that little bit harder to reach. Now, I expect you to disagree with what I've just said, but you've got to step up.</para>
<para>In Victoria some of the statements by the Labor candidate for Higgins, no doubt, ought to disappoint every single person in this room. They were undermining the efficacy of the AstraZeneca vaccine. I won't even repeat the things that were said because I don't want to give them any credence at all. I'm not a doctor—full disclosure—but I have as much information available to me as anyone else in this place and I can say that those statements that have been made are not grounded in fact. Yet we have candidates for the Labor Party out there spouting this stuff.</para>
<para>An opposition senator interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'SULLIVAN</name>
    <name.id>283585</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>But those are the sorts of views that we're hearing from your side of politics—views put to Australians who may be deciding whether to come forward for a vaccine. The path for Australia is clear. Life after lockdowns, no restrictions and opening up to the rest of the world again means Australians getting vaccinated. This is what we need to do. Rather than scoring cheap political points, you should be dedicating yourselves to encouraging people to go out and get vaccinated. You're better than that. Let's work together. Let's work together before Christmas so that we have even more reason to celebrate at Christmas.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>266524</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This matter of public importance raises five important questions. Can everyday Australians locked up under house arrest in Queensland, South Australia, New South Wales or Victoria tell the difference between the Liberal Party response and the Labor Party response to COVID? I can't. Can truck drivers and workers who need to cross the border for their livelihoods tell the difference between Labor's border closures and Liberal-Nationals' border closures? I can't. Can grieving Australians needing to travel to see a sick loved one or attend a funeral tell the difference between Labor states' callous restrictions and Liberal-National states' callous restrictions? I can't. Are Labor premiers standing up for small and medium-sized businesses? No, they're not. Liberal and Labor premiers are equally wreaking destruction on businesses, marriages and lives. On Senator O'Neill's motion regarding the vaccination program, can everyday Australians who believe in 'my body, my choice' tell the difference between the threats, intimidation and coercion that Liberals Scott Morrison, Gladys Berejiklian and Steven Marshall use, and the threats, intimidation and coercion that Labor's Dan Andrews, Mark McGowan and Anastasia Palaszczuk use? I can't. Has the Prime Minister or one state premier, Liberal or Labor, stood up for the rights of everyday Australians to manage COVID, not hide from it? No, they have not. Have you even asked the Australian people what they want? No, you have not.</para>
<para>Millions of Australians are currently under house arrest as a result of a COVID protocol that the Liberal-National and Labor parties, acting in concert as one party, enthusiastically imposed on Australians. It's a protocol that says that a sick person is sick until proven healthy. Yet 'sick until proven healthy' is the same as 'guilty until proven innocent'. Both represent a totalitarian mindset, a controlling mindset, that would have been soundly rejected at any other point in our history and should be rejected now. There's no difference between the Labor and Liberal-National parties when it comes to a COVID response. None. As in so many areas, Labor unites with the Liberal-Nationals.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This motion captures the deep frustration and pain of the Australian people regarding the failure of Prime Minister Morrison to deliver a speedy, effective rollout of COVID-19 vaccines and a safe national quarantine, meaning that 10 million Australians are languishing in lockdown, yet again.</para>
<para>In the last 24 hours, we've heard some outrageous statements by those opposite, somehow trying to link Labor senators' concerns about this government's abject failure in these areas to the Olympic Games. Yesterday we heard Senator Hughes attempt to describe Labor as unpatriotic and unsupportive of 'Team Australia' because we demand, on behalf of the Australian people, an efficient vaccine rollout that allows Australians to get on with their lives, to be safe and to be out of lockdown. We could describe Senator Hughes's awkward attempts to draw this connection as a double backflip with a sideways deflection. In fact, she flipped so many times we were concerned that she might stumble and lose her balance entirely.</para>
<para>Today we heard Senator Chandler perform a magnificent long jump as she sincerely explained that we must learn to be flexible and adapt. What a magnificent leap that was! And what an insult it was to the millions of Australians who have juggled home schooling with working from home, the businesses that have built online stores, the cafes and restaurants that have turned to takeaways, the churches, artists and community organisations that have rebuilt their congregations and audiences online, the teachers who have switched to online classrooms almost overnight, and the health workers who have been so flexible with their working hours that they have not seen their families for days and have worked to the point of exhaustion. The majority of Australians have done an amazing and courageous job of pivoting and adapting to this pandemic. They do not need or deserve lectures from the Liberal Party senators on this subject. They deserve an efficient and effective vaccine program. They deserve world-class quarantine facilities, and they're tired of this rubbish from a government which has proven itself utterly unable to show leadership.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister is excellent at dodging the facts. He gives a gold medal performance in avoiding the apology that he owes the country, and he is truly gifted at coming last, because, for all Senator Hughes's sidesteps and deflections, we are coming last in the developed world when it comes to the vaccine rollout. In my part of the world, north-west Tasmania, the data the government released this week shows that we are towards the tail end of the field. In the north-west just 21.8 per cent of people aged over 15 have been fully vaccinated, which is five per cent behind Launceston and 3.5 per cent behind the capital, Hobart.</para>
<para>On first jabs the situation is markedly worse. The north-west is a full nine per cent behind Hobart. Many are struggling to access vaccinations. They still can't go to their pharmacy for a COVID jab and, despite workplace programs for flu vaccinations, they can't get a COVID vaccination at work. Their local community vaccination hub is closed. In my part of the world it's going to be open again in mid-August for three weeks to deliver dose 2 only. We were contacted by a Devonport woman who, with her family, has recently been trying to get vaccinated. The family includes a support worker with many vulnerable clients. Their local vaccination hub had been closed down. They rely on their local chemist for the flu vaccine and assumed that they'd be able to be vaccinated there. But, no, that wasn't the case.</para>
<para>Meanwhile Australians hear from overseas that countries like Germany, Hungary and France are so advanced with their vaccination programs that they'll be offering booster shots by September. There'll be booster shots in Europe when only 21 per cent of people on the north-west coast will have had two jabs. It is a race, and we are coming last. In fact, we've been lapped. Despite the government's backflips and twists, Australians know how badly the government has botched hotel quarantine and vaccinations. I'm sure that the government senators will continue channelling their inner Olympians and desperately twisting their language for the remainder of this sitting fortnight. We need to talk about a single, simple message to the Australian people, not the mixed messages and blaming that we're hearing from the Morrison government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SMALL</name>
    <name.id>291406</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>With the Tokyo Olympics underway, I embrace the sporting analogies that suit the moment. We've heard lots about long jumps and leaps, but we haven't heard anything about policy belly flops. Australians following this at home have clearly seen one this week, with the Labor Party's latest cheap political stunt that ultimately highlights the fact that they have nothing positive to say about the President and are embarrassingly silent on a plan for Australia's recovery.</para>
<para>Every simply person on the government benches in this place, from the Prime Minister down, has been honest about our response to the pandemic not being perfect. It has had wrinkles and speed bumps, but I guess that's what you get when you're trying to run a country and having to deal with a once-in-a-century global pandemic. We have, however, shown great resilience and adaptability in the face of the biggest health crisis since the Spanish flu pandemic and, arguably, the biggest economic calamity since the Great Depression. We have turned a corner with a plan to return Australia to a post-COVID normal. The PM himself has taken responsibility for the early setbacks in our vaccination program. Let's not forget that the Italians prohibiting the release of 3.8 million doses of AstraZeneca in February was a significant setback completely outside the control of this government. But it was in fact the decision of the Morrison government in August last year to ensure that we had a sovereign vaccine manufacturing capability in this country that enabled us to overcome that.</para>
<para>Our progress to date isn't the disaster that Labor would represent. There was no plan at any time that had Australia fully vaccinated by today. Those opposite tend to forget that even at the beginning of the pandemic the Morrison government acted quickly and decisively on key decisions to protect lives and livelihoods—not only the things I just mentioned but also being the first nation to close its borders to the world, declaring COVID-19 to be a pandemic more than two weeks before the World Health Organization did so. That early action was effective and gave us time, but now it's being used against us for cheap political stunts by the Labor Party. They're trying to take away from Australia's success. It's not the government's success; this is a success that is shared by all Australians in protecting lives to this point of the pandemic and upholding livelihoods through economic security. By undermining that response, those opposite are doing a disservice to the Australian people as much as they are to themselves.</para>
<para>Because of those early actions the Morrison government took, Australia, through the appropriate health authorities, put the vaccines through a normal approval process. This wasn't an emergency approval process that had to be rushed through as bodies piled up in the streets, and that's the cold, hard reality of the countries that those opposite point to now as winning this race. Australia did not find itself in that very difficult situation, because of the leadership that this government took in the early phases of the pandemic. We don't hear much from those opposite about that, but the reality is that there are more Australians who are still with us today than would have otherwise been the case without those very important decisions taken by this government. We have acknowledged that the vaccine rollout has had a slow start, especially compared to countries that have had a much greater death rate. But when you understand that our vaccination rate is now at some 1.2 million shots into arms every week—and accelerating—it's clear that we are well on the way to returning to a post-COVID normal.</para>
<para>Those opposite may claim that this is a failure of the Prime Minister, that this is a failure of this government. But, when you look at the cold, hard facts and cut through the Labor spin and their policy bellyflops, this is what you find: 200,000 vaccines being administered daily and 1.2 million vaccines being administered weekly. As supply increases that will continue to rise. Almost 80 per cent of those aged over 70 are protected with a first dose, and over 42 per cent have received a second dose. If we take the over-50s, more than two-thirds are protected with a first dose and 27 per cent have received a second dose. More than four in 10 Australians aged over 16 are protected with a first dose. Some 20 per cent, or one in five, have already received a second dose. So when those opposite bleat about the slip in the time line, from the end of October to the end of the year, let's not forget that an eight-week delay, given the imperfect information and the fact that we're operating in a once-in-a-century pandemic, is actually a great success on the part of the Australian people—overcome adversity, thriving on the challenges that this pandemic represents and looking forward to the future with that inherently Australian optimism.</para>
<para>The vaccination program continues to exponentially increase because we are not resting on our laurels. Much as our economic success won't stop, this is a government that has also recently announced an extra 85 million Pfizer vaccine doses, the majority of which will be delivered in the next 12 months. That is not a failure, and I think most Australians agree. They can see that those opposite are fear mongering and playing political games to the detriment of all Australians.</para>
<para>Not content with cheap politics, this week those opposite decided to adopt, in typical Labor fashion, the idea of throwing money at the solution. Having learnt nothing from cash for clunkers, pink batts and cheques for dead people from the last time they sat on the government benches, now they've decided to try and bribe Australians with their own money to do what they are doing in overwhelming numbers every day. That shows that they have learned nothing from their past failures in government. They have learned nothing from eight years on the opposition benches. They have not only offended those Australians that continue to do the right thing but again demonstrated why they are unfit to sit on the government benches. They're still suck in that ideological fantasy land where government spending from the magic money tree is the fix-all solution.</para>
<para>On the other hand, as I've outlined today, this is a coalition government that has consistently protected lives and livelihoods, acted early, acted decisively, been pragmatic and non-ideological, followed the health advice and delivered excellent outcomes for Australians by keeping their lives protected and keeping their livelihoods intact. We have acknowledged that JobKeeper and JobSeeker allowed the Australian economy to survive what would have otherwise been an economic calamity.</para>
<para>The lack of realistic solutions and inconsistencies from those on the other benches is astounding. My colleague Senator O'Sullivan was very right to point out that there were predictions from those on the Labor side that the end of JobKeeper would cause the economy to fall off a cliff. Instead we saw an unemployment rate with a four in front of it, more Australians in work than there were at the start of the pandemic and, in fact, near record participation rates, particularly for females, in the Australian workforce. In one breath they criticise us for preventing international arrivals and leaving Australians stranded overseas and then, in the next, they're having a go at hotel quarantine, which was a consensus decision taken by the national cabinet to ensure that the maximum number of returning Australians could be accommodated in the context of the health advice. That shows that they've got nothing to say that's productive. They're willing to throw any truth overboard in the pursuit of their cheap politics. That is why the Morrison government can be trusted to steer this nation out of the pandemic but those opposite cannot.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WHISH-WILSON</name>
    <name.id>195565</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to pay my respects to those Australians around the country today who are doing it tough because of the pandemic and I would to acknowledge that this is a particularly difficult time for many Australians. I would also like to apologise, if the Prime Minister won't, on behalf of this government for its policy failure in the last 12 months. Australians are not only having to arm themselves against the anxiety of being in a pandemic and potentially getting the virus, repeated lockdowns, loss of individual freedoms, the depression that goes with these significant changes they're seeing in their lives, the loss of income and the loss of work; they are also having to arm themselves against the incompetence and stupidity of this government and against the U-turns, back flips, excuses, policy failures and lies.</para>
<para>It's no wonder with the mixed and conflicting information that's been out there, some of it still being peddled by coalition backbenchers, that Australians are confused, angry and anxious. It's no wonder that they are lashing out and protesting. It's no wonder some are vulnerable to misinformation in this time of fake news. It's no wonder that many won't listen to the facts and the science considering what has happened in this place in the last decade and how often this government and coalition senators have turned their backs on the science of things like climate change. Why should people listen to the government on COVID when it's actually a climate-denying government? It's no wonder. Australians are trying to get their lives back on track, and we have to do everything we can to help them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The vaccine rollout is a shambles. I'm not going to repeat all of the debate that has taken place in the chamber today, but I will zoom in on one pending aspect of the rollout failure. Last Thursday I got my second COVID jab. On Monday I downloaded my COVID vaccination certificate from the Services Australia website. Within 15 minutes of doing so, I had managed to generate a forgery. Our vaccination certificate has no security features whatsoever. Photoshop defeated it.</para>
<para>We're not using vaccine certificates yet, but their use is inevitable whether you like the vaccine or you don't, whether you've had it or you haven't. The moment that vaccination certificates are connected to health measures there will be value in forgery. We've seen this in Europe and in the United States. One of the problems is that, if you've got a false vaccination certificate and the health measures are relying on its validity, it will endanger public health. Why would you design a vaccination certificate with no security against forgery? There are certainly technical solutions available. This is typical of what's been happening so far in this embarrassing failure. Basically, the PM keeps turning up late to the recovery dance party, realising that he's left his dance shoes at home. He's doing it repeatedly. He's got to change.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>30484</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time for the discussion has expired.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>77</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consideration</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>77</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Scrutiny of Bills Committee</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Scrutiny Digest</title>
            <page.no>77</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the request of the chair of the Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Senator Polley, I present <inline font-style="italic">Scrutiny Digest</inline> 11 of 2021.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation Committee</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>77</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McGRATH</name>
    <name.id>217241</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the request of the chair of the Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation, Senator Fierravanti-Wells, I present Delegated Legislation Monitor 11 of 2021. I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the Senate take note of the report.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS</name>
    <name.id>e4t</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I appreciate this opportunity to speak to the tabling of the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation Committee's Delegated Legislation Monitor 11 of 2021. In monitor 11 of 2021 the committee has drawn particular attention to Australia’s Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Rules 2020. These rules relate to the Foreign Arrangements Scheme, which commenced on 10 December 2020.</para>
<para>As senators would be aware, the purpose of the scheme is to ensure that arrangements between state or territory governments and foreign entities do not adversely affect Australia's foreign relations and are not inconsistent with Australia's foreign policy. The scheme provides for states and territories and their entities to notify or seek approval from the Minister for Foreign Affairs if they propose to negotiate or enter or have entered a foreign arrangement. These rules, however, provide that certain arrangements are exempt from the notification and approval requirements of the scheme. The committee is concerned that the instrument therefore deals with significant matters that go to the scope of the scheme as a whole. This concern is heightened by the fact that a number of concepts within the rules appear to have a wide interpretation. For example, the rules provide that foreign arrangements solely dealing with minor administrative or logistical matters are exempt from the scheme. However, the scope of this exemption is unclear. The committee considered that the scope of the regulatory schemes should be clearly defined and be set out on the face of the primary legislation. Where significant details as to the scope of a scheme are nevertheless included in delegated legislation, the committee considers that such matters should be subject to regular parliamentary scrutiny. In this instance, the rules are subject to a regular 10-year sunsetting period, which significantly limits the ability of this chamber to scrutinise the instrument. The committee has been engaging with the minister in relation to these substantive concerns since March this year.</para>
<para>Last week, the minister advised that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade had sought the advice of the Attorney-General's Department in relation to the sunsetting regime set out in the legislation. The Attorney-General's Department suggested that the default 10-year sunset period set out in the legislation should be maintained unless there are clear policy reasons justifying a shorter sunset period. The minister advised the committee that, in her view, there are insufficiently clear policy reasons to justify a shorter sunsetting period for the rules. The minister also reiterated her previous advice that the rules will be subject to regular review to ensure they reflect the intention of the act and support the effective administration of the scheme. Further, the minister assured the committee that the three-year statutory review of the act will ensure timely and appropriate parliamentary scrutiny of the rules. Nonetheless, the committee remains concerned that the instrument deals with significant matters that go to the scope of the Foreign Arrangements Scheme as a whole and it appears that it is intended to remain in force for 10 years.</para>
<para>The committee considers that in the system of representative and responsible government established by the Constitution there are often important scrutiny reasons for providing for shorter sunsetting of instruments made by the executive under legislative power delegated by the parliament. Therefore, the committee does not agree that it is always a good legislative practice to apply the default sunsetting period of 10 years unless there are clear policy reasons to justify a shorter sunsetting period. Indeed, the committee regularly scrutinises instruments which include self-repeal provisions.</para>
<para>It is the committee's view that a five-year duration is the most appropriate mechanism for ensuring timely parliamentary scrutiny of the measures set out in these rules. The committee's scrutiny concerns are heightened in relation to this particular instrument, given this matter was discussed in detail with the department at a public hearing of the Foreign Affairs and Trade Legislation Committee's inquiry into the enabling bill. Further, senators will recall that, in the last sitting period, the Senate resolved to amend standing order 23 to reinforce the committee's scrutiny principles regarding delegated legislation which amends or modifies the operation of primary legislation. The committee, therefore, intends to rigorously pursue this type of scrutiny concern in accordance with the mandate provided by the Senate.</para>
<para>The committee gave a notice of motion to disallow the rules on 11 May 2021 as a precautionary measure to allow additional time for the committee to correspond with the minister and to seek a resolution to the committee's scrutiny concerns. This has not yet happened. The committee has therefore resolved to retain the disallowance notice until a satisfactory response to our concerns is received. In this regard, I note that this matter needs to be resolved urgently, as the Senate must consider the disallowance notice by Wednesday next week or the instrument will be deemed to have been disallowed under subsection 47(2) of act. The committee looks forward to receiving the minister's response to its views set out in the monitor as a matter of urgency. With these comments, I commend the committee's Delegated Legislation Monitor 11 of 2021 to the Senate.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>30484</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Do you wish the motion to be put or do you seek leave to continue your remarks?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS</name>
    <name.id>e4t</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The motion can be put</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity Committee</title>
          <page.no>78</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>78</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator SCARR</name>
    <name.id>282997</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity on its examination of the annual report of the Integrity Commissioner 2019-20, together with the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> record of proceedings and additional information. I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the Senate take note of the report.</para></quote>
<para>The committee thanks the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, which I will refer to as ACLEI, for a very comprehensive annual report. The committee is satisfied that ACLEI performed well against its performance criteria for the 2019-20 reporting period. Overall, ACLEI delivered positive investigative and operational results for the year despite facing several challenges, including the COVID-19 pandemic.</para>
<para>The committee commends ACLEI for concluding 93 investigations, the second highest number of investigations finalised in a reporting year. The annual report highlighted that as a result of ACLEI investigations five individuals were prosecuted in 2019-20, including three former Law Enforcement Integrity Commission Act agency employees. In addition, the Visa Integrity Taskforce formerly concluded. The committee commends the joint agency taskforce for its success in relation to visas, including the investigation of 31 corruption issues in visa processing and identifying a significant number of vulnerabilities relating to visa fraud.</para>
<para>The annual report demonstrated that ACLEI is focused on ensuring its workload is appropriately managed and that it is focused on investigating matters of serious and systemic corruption. At the end of 2019-20, ACLEI was investigating 75 corruption matters, a sizeable reduction from previous reporting periods. Furthermore, the Integrity Commissioner, Ms Jaala Hinchcliffe, provided three final investigation reports to the Attorney-General as ACLEI continues to reduce its backlog of final investigation reports.</para>
<para>The Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, the LEIC Act, requires agencies within ACLEI's jurisdiction to notify potential corruption matters. ACLEI also receives referrals of potential corruption issues from other sources. ACLEI must first assess the potential corruption issues and determine how best to manage them. It is apparent from the annual report that ACLEI is committed to reducing the time taken to complete these initial assessments to ensure serious and systemic corruption matters are prioritised. That is demonstrated by the adoption of a new target for the 2019-20 reporting period. The committee applauds ACLEI for adopting a stretch target to complete 90 per cent of assessments within 30 days of receipt. I just want to repeat that again because this is a very important point: ACLEI is now seeking to complete 90 per cent of those initial assessments, from the point in time when it gets that initial referral, within 30 days of receipt. The previous target, prior to the 2019-20 year, was a target of completing only 75 per cent of assessments within 90 days, so the target has actually become more aggressive—to complete 90 per cent of assessments within 30 days as opposed to 75 per cent within 90 days. The number of referrals to be assessed has increased, and the time period for those referrals to be assessed has decreased.</para>
<para>In that context, which is extraordinarily important, ACLEI reported that for the 2019-20 year it did not reach this ambitious target. It actually achieved 75 per cent of assessments in 30 days and 98 per cent of assessments within 90 days. So, again, that has to be seen in the context where the previous target was the complete 75 per cent of assessments within 90 days. For the 2019-20 year, 75 per cent of assessments were actually completed in 30 days and 98 per cent of assessments were completed within 90 days, as opposed to the previous target of completing 75 per cent of assessments in 90 days. So, whilst the annual report for 2019-20 indicates that the performance metric was not met, the performance was actually quite satisfactory, and it needs to be considered in that context. That's extremely important.</para>
<para>ACLEI worked closely with LEIC Act agencies throughout the year to support their investigations and corruption prevention activities. A total of 117 Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity agency investigations were completed by the end of the reporting period—a significant improvement from previous years. The committee notes that ACLEI revised its corporate plan and performance criteria during the reporting year and that it will report against the new performance measures in its upcoming annual report. The committee looks forward to reviewing ACLEI's results against the new framework.</para>
<para>I would like to thank the integrity commissioner, Ms Jaala Hinchcliffe, and all the staff at ACLEI for their ongoing good work addressing corrupt conduct within Australia's Commonwealth law enforcement agencies. I also thank all committee members for their contributions to the examination. In particular I'd like to mention how pleased I was to see Senator Bilyk, the deputy chair of my committee, make a contribution to a debate earlier in the day. It was quite heartwarming to see Senator Bilyk, albeit on the video screen. Mr Tony Zappia MP has certainly stepped up to the plate as the senior member from the opposition on the committee—and I've enjoyed working with him in your absence, Senator Bilyk—but he is no replacement for you. I look forward to your speedy return to this place.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Works Committee</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>79</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DAVEY</name>
    <name.id>281697</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's fourth report of 2021.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>79</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response—Better Advice) Bill 2021</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r6740" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response—Better Advice) Bill 2021</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>79</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUME</name>
    <name.id>266499</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a first time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>79</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUME</name>
    <name.id>266499</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">This Bill will empower the Financial Services and Credit Panel within the Australian Securities and Investments Commission as the single disciplinary body for financial advisers. The panel will be provided with new sanction powers to enable it to fully perform its disciplinary functions, including being able to issue an infringement notice, require that the financial adviser undertake additional training and recommend to ASIC that it seek a civil penalty. The Bill will also require all financial advisers who provide personal financial advice to retail clients to be registered.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This fulfils the Government's commitment to implement recommendation 2.10 of the Financial Services Royal Commission. The Royal Commission highlighted that the financial advice industry lacked an effective system of professional discipline, as a result of there being too many different pathways for consumer complaints and ineffective sanctions to deal with misconduct appropriately. In addition, while sanctions are available to ASIC, the lack of less serious sanctions means that ASIC generally only focuses on the most serious incidents.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Bill will also provide that tax (financial) advisers will no longer be regulated by the Tax Practitioners Board but instead be regulated only under the <inline font-style="italic">Corporations Act 2001</inline>. This implements recommendation 7.1 of the Tax Practitioners Board Review, which recommended that a new model be developed for regulating tax (financial) advisers in alignment with implementing recommendation 2.10 of the Royal Commission.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Bill also winds-up the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority and transfers its functions to the Minister responsible for the <inline font-style="italic">Corporations Act 2001</inline> and ASIC.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">These reforms will further streamline the number of bodies involved in the oversight of financial advisers, resulting in continuous improvements to the regulatory framework for the financial advice sector and enhanced access for Australians to affordable and quality financial advice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Finally, the Legislative and Governance Forum on Corporations was consulted in relation to the Bill and has approved them as required under the <inline font-style="italic">Corporations Agreement 2002</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.</para></quote>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
<para>Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an order of the day for a later hour.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Ministerial Suitability Commission of Inquiry Bill 2021</title>
          <page.no>80</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="s1300" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Ministerial Suitability Commission of Inquiry Bill 2021</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Committee</title>
            <page.no>80</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the request of Senator Waters, I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the Ministerial Suitability Commission of Inquiry Bill 2021 be referred to the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 1 September 2021.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATERS</name>
    <name.id>192970</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I rise to debate whether the Ministerial Suitability Commission of Inquiry Bill 2021, my private member's bill to set up a commission of inquiry into whether Mr Christian Porter is fit to remain a minister of the Crown given the rape allegations against him, should be referred to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee for consideration. Bills normally go through this process, but not this bill. Anyone listening might remember that back in June I kept trying to progress this bill, which seeks a pathway to justice for Kate Thornton and to uphold standards for our parliament's ministry. On multiple occasions the government blocked me from having the bill being read a second time, which is unprecedented. I kept trying, and the warnings from the Senate President kept escalating. So today I am again trying to speak for my bill, which has been properly introduced, to follow the normal process of being subject to a Senate inquiry, which will then make a recommendation as to whether or not the bill should be supported.</para>
<para>We'll see if the government, with their backers in One Nation, will again vote to stop this. Let's face it, this is not the first time the government have shut down efforts to investigate their actions or their members. This government can't manage a vaccine rollout but they sure can manage a protection racket.</para>
<para>This bill would do one thing: it would establish an independent process to determine whether Mr Christian Porter is a fit and proper person to hold a ministerial position, to sit at that head table when decisions are made in this country, to have a say on this government's position on sexual harassment reforms, to have a say on responses to the Foster review or the Human Rights Commission's review into the safety of parliamentary workplaces and to have a say on whether we should have a code of conduct for politicians.</para>
<para>Mr Porter has been the subject of very serious allegations—allegations of rape. He has strenuously denied those allegations and sued the national broadcaster for reporting on them. Those proceedings were discontinued, and Mr Porter fought hard to have the evidence that was submitted to the court kept hidden from the public. The evidence that was revealed through that case raises serious questions about Minister Porter's suitability.</para>
<para>You would think that a prime minister wouldn't want such questions hanging over the head of any of his ministers. You would think that an innocent person would welcome an investigation to clear their name. Yet the Prime Minister seems completely disinterested in getting answers to these questions. He hasn't read the dossier of allegations sent to him many months ago. He obviously hasn't had a chat with his wife, Jenny, about what the moral thing to do is, either. Instead, the Prime Minister has repeatedly tried to move on from this issue. He evidently thought a belated ministerial reshuffle would fix it. Imagine underestimating the women of Australia so much that you think that moving an alleged rapist sideways into a different ministry would address the concerns that at least half the population has about sexual assault. The Prime Minister's response reeks of male privilege, and it fundamentally misjudges the anger and the injustice that women feel about continued rape, sexual assault, harassment, discrimination and just plain sexism.</para>
<para>If the Prime Minister can ignore that in Parliament House then it says to women everywhere that their experiences are not valid, not important and not to be believed. The Prime Minister doesn't believe that Minister Porter raped Kate Thornton. He asked Minister Porter, who denied it, and that's enough for the Prime Minister—he just takes his mate's word for it. He didn't read the dossier of allegations. He didn't ask for or order any form of independent inquiry. He didn't even consider whether Minister Porter might have been in breach of the Prime Minister's own ministerial standards. Instead, he appointed Mr Porter to a fresh ministry, and this week he promoted him. Minister Porter is now the Acting Leader of the House—his old job—just like harassers everywhere, who stay in their jobs while survivors are the ones who leave their jobs, are pushed out or, worse, as in Kate's case, are so let down by the justice system that they give up.</para>
<para>There is no justice for women survivors anywhere while rape allegations are allowed to persist against a Commonwealth minister of the Crown without any avenue for those allegations to be resolved, and that is the case here. With the defamation case documents not being released and with Kate having, tragically, ended her life there are no avenues remaining to inquire into the accusations. The Australian Federal Police and the New South Wales police have confirmed that no further investigation is possible. The only avenue is for the Prime Minister to call an inquiry. And since he won't—or hasn't yet—that's what this bill would do. It would set up an independent inquiry into whether Minister Porter is fit to remain a minister given the unresolved rape allegations against him.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister's Statement of Ministerial Standards requires ministers to 'act at all times to the highest possible standards of probity'. Those standards are not worth the paper that they're written on, because there are multiple incidents where the Prime Minister is not enforcing them. The Prime Minister failed to take action to inquire into the allegations and to inquire into whether Minister Porter is deserving of a ministerial position. The Prime Minister has declared Mr Porter an innocent man based on his assurances alone. Despite tens of thousands of women and their allies rallying in March demanding, amongst other things, an independent inquiry, this week the Prime Minister promoted Mr Porter back to the position of Leader of the House—acting, at least. Women do not trust this Prime Minister, and nor should they. The Prime Minister doesn't believe women. He is sending us back to the 1950s and is in dangerous denial about the epidemic of sexual assault and violence against women.</para>
<para>In an opinion piece in the newspapers today the courageous Grace Tame, Australian of the Year, gave voice to the disgust felt by women around the country. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Prime Minister Scott Morrison has just overseen Christian Porter’s assuming of the role of acting leader of the House of Representatives. Amid a burgeoning, pre-eminent mass awakening to the endemic issue of sexual abuse, this decision marks a proverbial slap in the face of our entire nation.</para></quote>
<para>She went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Outside of Parliament, positions of public trust are governed by codes of conduct that stipulate one must be a “fit and proper” person in order to occupy them, such as in the case of doctors who are bound by the Hippocratic oath. Furthermore, their adequacy—in terms of both knowledge and ethics—is repeatedly challenged and updated through mandated continuing professional development.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In Parliament, however, no such requirements exist. It is the Prime Minister who sets the standards and maintains them by appointing cabinet ministers at his or her discretion.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Given the seriousness of the allegations against Porter, the bare minimum test of his fitness to hold ministerial office would be an independent inquiry. How damning it is that the government refused to allow for one.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If the Prime Minister’s recent rhetoric about wanting to support assault survivors and protect women’s safety was indeed true, he would surely go to any lengths possible to ensure there was not an accused rapist amongst his own staff. Clearly, it has been nothing but lip service. His actions speak volumes that drown out his every word.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">And now, not only has Porter been permitted to remain in office, he’s been temporarily elevated. His are circumstances steeped in the protective privileges of a patriarchal Parliament.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">There is no way this decision was accidental. It is a transparently deliberate, definitive statement that reeks of abuse of power and a blatant disregard of the people.</para></quote>
<para>As Ms Tame says so powerfully, without an independent and rigorous inquiry, serious and unresolved allegations hang over the head of a sitting minister; and they damage the confidence of the Australian people in government and, more importantly, in this institution of government, the parliament.</para>
<para>This bill is not seeking a predetermined outcome. It is not a witch-hunt—as the folk in One Nation, who regularly defend and vote with the government, have characterised it. It does not ignore Mr Porter's strenuous denial of the allegation. Instead it recognises that an independent, credible examination of Mr Porter's suitability is necessary to restore public faith in the accountability and integrity of parliament and the functioning of Australia's democracy. Referring the bill to the Finance and Public Administration Committee will allow any concerns about the independence, the operation or the confidentiality of the commission of inquiry to be discussed and, if necessary, address amendments to the bill.</para>
<para>This year has repeatedly challenged the government to take women's safety seriously, to listen to survivors. Ms Tame, in her opinion piece, reflected on what Mr Porter resuming his role as Leader of the House this week says to survivors and what message it sends to perpetrators. She said in conclusion:</para>
<quote><para class="block">My heart breaks at the thought of survivors still living in silence, looking to our leaders for hope.</para></quote>
<para>We need to provide some hope that this parliament will take women's safety seriously, that it will not just sweep serious accusations under the carpet, that it will ensure allegations are tested and that those wielding power in this country are deserving of that privilege. I urge the Senate to refer this bill to the committee for consideration.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATT</name>
    <name.id>245759</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think it's very important for all of us who're shortly going to be voting on Senator Waters's motion for reference to the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee of the Ministerial Suitability Commission of Inquiry Bill 2021 to understand exactly what this motion is. It doesn't seek to support a bill or any aspect of a bill. What it seeks to do is simply to refer a bill to a committee for inquiry and report, something that we in this chamber do each and every day. It is entirely normal for this chamber to refer bills to committees for investigation so that different parties, different senators, can make a decision as to how they intend to vote. That is why Labor feels entirely comfortable voting for this motion. We are comfortable with the idea that such a bill should be referred to a committee, and it is indeed strange that the government is not willing to even refer this bill for examination. It won't be until we have an inquiry into this bill that all issues associated with it can be properly explored. It may be that the bill turns out to be a very good idea and is supported by a wide range of stakeholders. Equally, it may be that the bill is a very bad idea, or that potentially there is some good in it but amendments may be necessary. But we won't actually have the opportunity to know that until the Senate does its job and performs its usual function of investigating and considering the bill and hearing from all stakeholders as to its pros and cons.</para>
<para>This motion does not require the Liberal Party, the National Party or any senator in this chamber to take a position on the Ministerial Suitability Commission of Inquiry Bill. All this motion requires is for a Senate committee to do what Senate committees do all the time, and that is to look at a piece of legislation, so the question must be asked: if the government is intending to oppose this motion, what is it so afraid of? Why are they so afraid of even having the Senate or Senate committees consider whether we should put in place legislation for a new suitability commission governing the responsibilities and conduct of ministers? What is the Liberal Party so afraid of? What is the Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, so afraid of? The answer can only be that they are concerned about what such a commission would find in relation to the activities of serving government ministers, in particular the former Attorney-General and now Minister for Industry, Science and Technology, Mr Porter.</para>
<para>As we know, the allegations of serious criminal conduct that have been made and still hang over the head of the former Attorney-General and now minister for industry, Mr Porter, are about as serious as allegations can be. Labor's position on Mr Porter has been clear for some time. In light of the seriousness of the allegations made against Mr Porter, an independent inquiry must be held to investigate these matters and to ensure that the Australian people have confidence in Mr Porter's fitness for ministerial office. In contrast, what we've seen from the Prime Minister all along, throughout this scandal, is a very clear position, and that is that the Prime Minister will do anything and say anything, no matter how ridiculous, to avoid setting up any such independent inquiry. It's being continued now by government senators intending to vote against this motion, which would merely empower a Senate committee to review whether a ministerial suitability commission of inquiry is a good idea or not. Who can forget the Prime Minister's utterly absurd assertion that an inquiry into Mr Porter's fitness for ministerial office would undermine the rule of law? It simply would not. The suggestion is utterly ridiculous. Mr Morrison eventually abandoned that line of defence and changed tack—</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Scarr interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATT</name>
    <name.id>245759</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll take that interjection from Senator Scarr. I am a lawyer, Senator Scarr, and I have a very good understanding of what the rule of law is. I know that you do as well, and I know that if you were actually able to make an independent decision, rather than being bound by your party, you would also have supported an independent inquiry into Mr Porter. Senator Scarr, in his short time in the Senate, has demonstrated that he is a strong supporter of the Senate committee system, and I commend him for that. If Senator Scarr and all of his colleagues in the Liberal Party were genuinely exercising their own independent thought, then they would be supporting this motion, which, as I say, simply proposes to refer a bill to a Senate committee for investigation. I know Senator Scarr has only just entered the chamber, and I don't make any reflection on him for that. What I was saying before Senator Scarr entered the chamber was that all this motion does is propose to refer a bill to a Senate committee for consideration—exactly the kind of thing Senator Scarr, Senator Smith, Senator Davey, Senator Hume, even you, Mr Acting Deputy President McGrath, and I vote to do on a regular basis.</para>
<para>Mr Morrison eventually abandoned his utterly ridiculous argument that an independent inquiry into Mr Porter's fitness for ministerial office would undermine the rule of law. He changed tack by trying to hide behind Mr Porter's private defamation action against the ABC. Mr Morrison tried to argue that the private defamation action launched by Mr Porter amounted to an independent inquiry into the allegations against him. I know that Senator Scarr realises that that is also utterly absurd. It is nonsense to argue that a private defamation action amounts to an independent inquiry into allegations, but that is the argument that the Prime Minister made. It was similarly ridiculous. A private defamation action is no substitute for a proper inquiry into Mr Porter's fitness for office. But, even if it were, Mr Porter, of course, has now abandoned the case against the ABC, before any evidence was heard or any witnesses were questioned or cross-examined. That is the kind of inquiry that satisfies the Prime Minister—a private defamation action which is abandoned before it goes to trial, in the very early stages of those proceedings.</para>
<para>Of course, now we've seen Mr Porter take the extremely unusual step of trying to keep secret the ABC's defence. If Mr Porter has his way, we will never see the nature of the allegations, the investigations or the defence that the ABC has prepared, which no doubt details the evidentiary background it has for the allegations that were made in certain programs that the ABC aired. The Prime Minister is fast running out of excuses for why an independent investigation should not be held into the allegations against Mr Porter, and I suppose we're all wondering what the next excuse from the Prime Minister will be. Will he now hide behind the South Australian coroner and argue that that's an independent investigation into what are extremely serious allegations against his former Attorney-General and now minister for industry, Mr Porter?</para>
<para>Labor in no way prejudges the allegations against Mr Porter. Not at any time, to my knowledge, has a Labor member of parliament or senator concluded that these allegations are correct. Of course, when allegations of this nature are made, what should occur is that they be properly investigated before conclusions are drawn. But that is exactly the kind of independent inquiry that the Prime Minister and his government have blocked every step of the way since these allegations were aired. Labor's position is that we simply believe that it is untenable for Mr Porter to continue to sit at the cabinet table as a minister while such serious allegations against him remain untested and unresolved. I might add that it is simply astonishing that, in an environment where any reasonable observer would think that Mr Porter should not remain in the cabinet while these allegations are unresolved, the Prime Minister has now taken the extraordinary step of actually giving Mr Porter a promotion. He has actually appointed Mr Porter as the Acting Leader of the House in the parliament. As Grace Tame, the current Australian of the Year, observed in her column today, the position of Leader of the House is a position of great power. Unfortunately, in this government's hands it has been used repeatedly to suppress debate and to suppress an examination of the truth.</para>
<para>That is a fairly ironic, a sadly ironic, situation for the Prime Minister and Mr Porter to find themselves in. In a situation where they have gone to great lengths to suppress any independent examination of the allegations against Mr Porter, they have now appointed him to a position in the House of Representatives—a position which no doubt gets a nice little pay rise with it as well—that has been used repeatedly by this government to suppress debate and to suppress the examination of government conduct in the House of Representatives. It shows again that this Prime Minister is utterly tone deaf when it comes to these sorts of allegations. By promoting someone like Mr Porter to this kind of position at a point in time when these sorts of allegations continue to hang over Mr Porter's head, the Prime Minister shows that he is utterly tone deaf when it comes to the cultural problems within his party about how women are treated.</para>
<para>It is important to note that the New South Wales police did not carry out an investigation into the allegations against Mr Porter, due to the tragic death by suicide of the woman making the allegations before she was able to make a formal statement to the police. This means that, contrary to claims made by the Prime Minister, these allegations have never been properly investigated, let alone tested in a criminal hearing before a court. There has been no completed investigation by New South Wales police and no investigation at all by the Federal Police. With the tragic death of the woman who made the allegation, it is now very unlikely that the police will ever investigate the very serious allegations she made against Mr Porter.</para>
<para>As Prime Minister, it is up to Mr Morrison to enforce his Statement of Ministerial Standards. Despite months of trying to avoid this responsibility, it is still not too late for Mr Morrison to take the steps required to demonstrate to the Australian people that Mr Porter is a fit and proper person to hold ministerial office. The way for this to occur is that the Prime Minister should establish the independent inquiry into the allegations against Mr Porter that Labor has been calling for months. In the absence of a police investigation and a possible criminal trial, such an independent inquiry, conducted at arm's length from the Morrison government, would provide the best means for the allegations against Mr Porter to be tested, for Mr Porter to have the opportunity to clear his name and for the Australian people to have confidence in Mr Porter's fitness to continue to hold ministerial office. Given that the Prime Minister has, up until now, refused to establish such an inquiry, the least we can do is ask the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee to inquiry into this bill—a bill that would be redundant if the Prime Minister simply did his job and acted like a leader.</para>
<para>In closing, I again implore government senators to reflect on the position that they're taking on this motion. This is not a debate about whether the bill should be supported or not. Frankly, Labor haven't made up their minds yet about whether they would support such a bill if it were to be put before the parliament; that is the purpose of this inquiry. To not prejudge whether a bill should be supported or not but simply to have an inquiry to help inform a position that is then taken is a common position for parties to take prior to an inquiry. I haven't been here that long myself, but I've participated in numerous Senate inquiries, the point of each of which has been to inform Labor's position as to whether we would support such a bill, and Senator Scarr, Senator Davey, Senator Hume and Senator Smith have done the same thing. Again, I commend each of those senators for at times suggesting amendments to their own government's legislation, which they have put forward on the basis of evidence that they have heard at Senate committee hearings. That is exactly what is being sought here. All that is being proposed is that this bill be referred to a Senate committee for consideration—to listen to stakeholders, to decide whether we should support it or not, to decide whether amendments should be moved or not.</para>
<para>But, unfortunately, this government, under the leadership of this Prime Minister, is, yet again, blocking the power of the Senate and the power of the parliament to inquire into a simple piece of legislation. We know why they're doing it. It is because they are intent on maintaining this cover-up of the activities and the allegations against Mr Porter. It is a disgraceful abuse of the parliament. The government and its senators should support this motion. They should support the right of the Senate to consider this bill. If they don't do so, they are just engaging in the ongoing cover-up that this government has adopted in relation to the allegations against Mr Porter from day one.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 2, in the name of Senator Waters, be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The Senate divided. [18:03]<br />(The President—Senator Ryan)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>14</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brown, CL</name>
                  <name>Carr, KJ</name>
                  <name>Chisholm, A</name>
                  <name>Farrell, D</name>
                  <name>Gallagher, KR</name>
                  <name>Hanson-Young, SC</name>
                  <name>Lines, S</name>
                  <name>McKim, NJ</name>
                  <name>O'Neill, D</name>
                  <name>Patrick, RL</name>
                  <name>Pratt, LC</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, AE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Watt, M</name>
                  <name>Whish-Wilson, PS</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>17</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brockman, S</name>
                  <name>Cash, MC</name>
                  <name>Chandler, C</name>
                  <name>Davey, P (teller)</name>
                  <name>Duniam, J</name>
                  <name>Hughes, H</name>
                  <name>Hume, J</name>
                  <name>McGrath, J</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, B</name>
                  <name>McMahon, S</name>
                  <name>O'Sullivan, MA</name>
                  <name>Rennick, G</name>
                  <name>Roberts, M</name>
                  <name>Ryan, SM</name>
                  <name>Seselja, Z</name>
                  <name>Small, B</name>
                  <name>Smith, DA</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS</title>
        <page.no>85</page.no>
        <type>REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Implementing the Technology Investment Roadmap) Regulations 2021</title>
          <page.no>85</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Disallowance</title>
            <page.no>85</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the request of Senator Waters, I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That section 7 of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Implementing the Technology Investment Roadmap) Regulations 2021, made under the <inline font-style="italic">Australian Renewable Energy Agency Act 2011</inline>, be disallowed [F2021L01043].</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Fifteen sitting days remain, including today, to resolve the motion or the instrument will be deemed to have been disallowed.</inline></para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATERS</name>
    <name.id>192970</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Here we are again, disallowing the ARENA regulation that the chamber actually balled up in the previous sitting week. We have just disallowed this, and now the government is right back here again. The moral of the story is don't get in the way of the Morrison government and a bucket of public money for their gas donors.</para>
<para>Since the Senate disallowed the regulation last month, the government have made no effort to negotiate with anyone on what the ARENA funding programs might look like. If they had done, we might not be in this position today. We've pared back the disallowance to only stop the low-emissions fund that would shovel money at gas companies, who are in fact the future employers of many coalition MPs in this building. Those gas companies are the very same companies that also donate more money to the Liberals—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>217241</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I think we've lost connection with Senator Waters. While Senator Waters is dialling back in, Senator Brown, I'll give you the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CAROL BROWN</name>
    <name.id>F49</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you. I rise to speak on the disallowance of section 7 of these ARENA regulations. Labor have moved the same disallowance, and we will be supporting this motion. Labor are proud that we created the Australian Renewable Energy Agency—ARENA—in 2012 to help support technologies build our future energy system and create jobs for the future. While we invested $2.5 billion in ARENA in 2012, those opposite have tried to undermine, gut and abolish the integrity of ARENA for the past eight years. Labor support the sections of the regulations relating to the 2020 budget measures for programs including freight and industrial efficiency, regional microgrids and future fuels.</para>
<para>These revised regulations include new safeguards on the implementation of those budget measures. This is an omission that Labor and the Senate were right to disallow in the original regulations. However, section 7 of these regulations, attempting to force the Renewable Energy Agency to fund non-renewables, is just the latest in a series of moves by those opposite to undermine the integrity of Australia's climate institutions established by Labor and to circumvent the parliament by attempting to change laws via regulation. The object of the ARENA Act 2011 is to:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(a) improve the competitiveness of renewable energy technologies; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) increase the supply of renewable energy in Australia.</para></quote>
<para>Experts say that funding other technologies would be inconsistent with the object of the act and would likely be subject to legal challenge.</para>
<para>Unlike the Greens, who are ideological about technologies like CCS, Labor supports any new energy technologies where they stack up scientifically and commercially. But deserving non-renewable technologies should be supported in other ways and not be allowed to dilute ARENA's funding and expertise. For example : if the government had wanted to support CCS technologies, it shouldn't have abolished the CCS Flagships program and cut half a billion dollars of funding. We note that the concerns about the potential legality of going beyond the act via the regulation were even shared by the minister's party room colleague who chairs the Liberal-led Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation. We also note that the minister had to remake these regulations after a humiliating defeat of the original regulations in the Senate just two months ago.</para>
<para>Labor created ARENA in 2012 and we will always protect it. We will protect it from becoming Mr Angus Taylor's slush fund because it is doing an incredible job, it has maintained its integrity, it has been able to provide jobs for Australians and it has been able to deliver returns on investment for taxpayers. Return on taxpayer investment is not the first thing that comes to mind when Minister Taylor has an idea. For every $1 invested by ARENA, the economy sees $3 leveraged. We want to ensure that the high rate of return continues. We will be supporting this disallowance.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank Senator Brown for being prepared to make her contribution, although I do disassociate the Greens with her remarks about the Australian Greens! The point Senator Waters was making was that the Greens have pared back this disallowance to only stop the low-emissions fund , which would shovel money at gas companies, who are the future employers of many coalition MPs in this building. These gas companies are the very same companies that give more to the LNP, the Liberals and the Nationals in political donations than they actually contribute to the Australian people in tax. But today the Senate can stop that flow of money again.</para>
<para>Now, if the government had tried to negotiate with anyone, they would know that the Greens are fine with ARENA getting new money to spend on transforming industry, electric vehicles, freight and regional microgrids. That is why we are not seeking to disallow those specific measures in this regulation. The final key objection to the previous regulation is still present in section 7 of this latest executive order, namely that this regulation appears to be ultra vires—that is, beyond the legal power of the minister to enact. The new regulation, interestingly, goes to great lengths to make the case as to why the government thinks it is lawful—which itself is extremely revealing—but, of course, ultimately it is the courts , not the minister , that will determine whether it would survive or not. The word 'renewable' is in the name of ARENA. The act is limited to investments in renewable technologies, not polluting sources like gas. Even if they are miraculously low emissions—and anyone who has been paying attention knows they are not—they are most certainly 100 per cent not renewable.</para>
<para>As Senator Waters said in her last contribution, a regulation cannot operate on subject matter that is beyond the scope of the parent act. This is ultra vires—beyond the capacity of the minister to enact. The government is so desperate to give public money to its gas donors that it is willing to break the law to do it. The Parliamentary Library has advised that this appears to be beyond legal power, and even the Scrutiny of Bills Committee, which the government has the numbers on said the same thing. If this disallowance fails, the regulation will end up in the legal system. Hopefully, the Senate will strike it down and save everyone time and money. We can prevent what One Nation love to describe as a lawyers' picnic. We can prevent that, colleagues, by a vote here in the Senate this evening.</para>
<para>ARENA is a massive success story for this country. ARENA is the kind of thing that happens when you put the Greens into the balance of power with a Labor government in the House of Representatives. Greens in the balance of power in the House of Representatives and in the Senate delivered the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. They delivered ARENA for this country. They delivered a world-leading price on carbon, before Tony Abbott came and tore it apart. We can do this again, colleagues. If the Australian people vote the Greens into the balance of power, we can make the next government act more strongly and more quickly on things like climate change.</para>
<para>As a result of what happened last time the Greens were in the balance of power in the House, we've seen the cost of solar in this country driven down through ARENA's solar auctions. We've seen ARENA fund research and jobs for how Australia is going to succeed in this world where there is no place for coal, oil and gas. The greatest indicator of ARENA's importance and success is the unrelenting attacks this government has thrown at them.</para>
<para>On behalf of the Greens, I thank the Australian Labor Party and the crossbenchers, who we have worked with constructively and respectfully to try to save the original intent of ARENA—that is, to support genuinely renewable energy in this country. I genuinely hope today, and I offer on behalf of the Australian Greens our desire, that the Senate will support this motion so the government does not succeed in weakening this critical public agency, which is so important as we see the climate that sustains all life on this planet breaking down around us as we speak here in the chamber tonight. I urge the Senate to support this disallowance.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>217241</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Waters, you've appeared back on screen. Do you wish to continue your contribution?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator WATERS</name>
    <name.id>192970</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator McKim was able to do that on my behalf, which I'm very grateful for. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUME</name>
    <name.id>266499</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government is committed to supporting the future of jobs in our resources and manufacturing sectors while driving down our emissions. If successful, this disallowance will prohibit millions in funding for carbon capture and storage, which is essential technology for reducing carbon emissions in manufacturing and heavy industry. CCS is an accepted technology that is being invested in by the Biden administration, the UK, the EU, Japan, Singapore, Canada and Korea as part of their plans to reach net zero emissions. The IEA has said that CCS is essential to meeting climate goals. If successful, this disallowance will abandon jobs in our resources, energy and manufacturing sectors.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that business of the Senate matter No. 3 in the name of Senator Waters be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The Senate divided. [18:23]<br />(The President—Senator Ryan)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>15</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brown, CL</name>
                  <name>Carr, KJ</name>
                  <name>Chisholm, A</name>
                  <name>Farrell, D</name>
                  <name>Gallagher, KR</name>
                  <name>Hanson-Young, SC</name>
                  <name>Lambie, J</name>
                  <name>Lines, S</name>
                  <name>McKim, NJ</name>
                  <name>O'Neill, D</name>
                  <name>Patrick, RL</name>
                  <name>Pratt, LC</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, AE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Watt, M</name>
                  <name>Whish-Wilson, PS</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>15</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Askew, W</name>
                  <name>Canavan, MJ</name>
                  <name>Cash, MC</name>
                  <name>Chandler, C</name>
                  <name>Davey, P (teller)</name>
                  <name>Hume, J</name>
                  <name>McGrath, J</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, B</name>
                  <name>McMahon, S</name>
                  <name>Rennick, G</name>
                  <name>Roberts, M</name>
                  <name>Ryan, SM</name>
                  <name>Scarr, P</name>
                  <name>Smith, DA</name>
                  <name>Van, D</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>87</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Urban Congestion Fund</title>
          <page.no>87</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Order for the Production of Documents</title>
            <page.no>87</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DEAN SMITH</name>
    <name.id>241710</name.id>
    <electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Earlier in the afternoon, the Senate was dealing with notice of motion No. 1201 in Senator Gallagher's office and the government whip at the time, which was me, made an error in the counting and pairing of the government's position. I have consulted with other whips around the chamber and, with the leave of the chamber, I was hoping we might be able to recommit that verdict.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Given the extensive pairing arrangements, that is understandable and leave is granted. Senator Urquhart?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I was going to ask Senator Smith for an explanation, but I think he has given that. We are happy to grant leave.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Patrick?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Just for clarification: which notice of motion was it?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It was the order for the production of documents with respect to the Urban Congestion Fund. Senator McKim?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McKIM</name>
    <name.id>JKM</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I indicate that the Australian Greens would be happy for this to be recommitted.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will re-put the motion. With the leave of the Senate, we are recommitting this. The question is that motion No. 1201, in the name of Senator Gallagher, be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The Senate divided. [18:30]<br />(The President—Senator Ryan)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>15</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Brown, CL</name>
                  <name>Carr, KJ</name>
                  <name>Chisholm, A</name>
                  <name>Farrell, D</name>
                  <name>Gallagher, KR</name>
                  <name>Hanson-Young, SC</name>
                  <name>Lambie, J</name>
                  <name>Lines, S</name>
                  <name>McKim, NJ</name>
                  <name>O'Neill, D</name>
                  <name>Patrick, RL</name>
                  <name>Pratt, LC</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, AE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Watt, M</name>
                  <name>Whish-Wilson, PS</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>15</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Askew, W</name>
                  <name>Cash, MC</name>
                  <name>Davey, P (teller)</name>
                  <name>Hughes, H</name>
                  <name>Hume, J</name>
                  <name>McDonald, S</name>
                  <name>McGrath, J</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, B</name>
                  <name>McMahon, S</name>
                  <name>Rennick, G</name>
                  <name>Roberts, M</name>
                  <name>Ryan, SM</name>
                  <name>Scarr, P</name>
                  <name>Smith, DA</name>
                  <name>Van, D</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>88</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021</title>
          <page.no>88</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r6745" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>88</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator RICE</name>
    <name.id>155410</name.id>
    <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to start this speech by acknowledging all those who have had the most horrific last 18 months. There are people who have lost loved ones, who have long-term illnesses, who are supporting families and friends with long-term illnesses. There are people who have lost employment, who have lost their homes, who can't afford to pay the rent. There are people who have juggled working from home with home schooling, who have suffered anxiety and depression from social isolation and people who have been locked down for weeks, and my heart goes out to everybody in greater Sydney at the moment and those locked down in Brisbane. I know as a Melbournian what you were going through. There are people who are separated from families, who haven't seen loved ones for over two years, who have missed saying goodbye to parents, who have missed funerals. There are people struggling with mental illness, for whom the anxiety and the depression and the stressors of just keeping your head above water have been overwhelming. And there are elderly people and people with disabilities who have had their world shrink around them, who have felt locked down in their homes for most of the last year and a half, who have had friends no longer able to visit. My mother, who lives at home by herself at the age of 89, says she and her friends just feel as if the world is telling them not to go out. Then we've got young people who are missing out on the rituals of coming of age, missing out on blossoming relationships, missing out on being on campus at uni, missing out on travelling to the big smoke, of leaving home and doing that big overseas trip on their own or with friends. And then there are the people who have had to go out to work during this pandemic despite the risks—the health professionals, the logistics workers, the childcare workers, the school teachers and the Uber drivers bringing the rest of us our home deliveries. And then there are the people who have been told that they should be in isolation, but they have taken the risk to go out and earn some money because there has been nothing else for them to do as otherwise there would be no food on the table, no money to pay the rent. We can admonish them and say, 'You're breaking the law. It's no good for the health of our community and it's helping the pandemic to take off.' But what would you do if it were a choice between going out and earning a quid and being homeless and on the streets with your family?</para>
<para>Of course the Greens are supporting this bill that is before us this evening. It will provide support for many of these people, but it's not enough. This bill will still leave people living in poverty, still struggling on JobSeeker payments of $43 a day. It will leave people with skyrocketing rents and no mortgage freezes. Rather than the minimum handouts that the government feels it can get away with, we should see JobSeeker again doubled to a liveable income of at least $80 a day, as it was last year. We should see JobKeeper reintroduced. Instead—and this is a choice—we have got the government giving minimum support at the same time it is giving tax cuts, billions and billions of dollars in tax cuts, to its rich mates. This is a choice, and this government is choosing to spend money to support its rich mates, rather than giving the rest of the community the support it needs to get through this pandemic.</para>
<para>We need to see the federal government pull its finger out, fix the botched vaccination rollout and invest in federally run fit-for-purpose quarantine facilities so that Australians can come home and be reunited with their families. There are still tens of thousands of Australians who are stranded overseas. They have been let down by Prime Minister Morrison. They are facing incredibly challenging situations around the world and they can't come home. Some are running short of money and have no support networks. All they want to do is to come home to Australia, but they can't. Some are facing acute health crises and incredible mental health strains. Some of them just want to see loved ones: dying parents, new family members, people they want to care for and support here in Australia. But they can't. And why? Because Prime Minister Morrison has let them down. They can't even return to their own country. It's important that we note that it is a basic human right to return to your own country. Amnesty International summarises this right:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights say that everyone has the right to return home to their country, and shall never be deprived of the right to enter their own country.</para></quote>
<para>The problem is that the government has introduced a cap on how many people can return to Australia each week. The cap was introduced so that there were enough facilities in Australia for returnees to isolate. The answer is simple: by increasing the capacity to allow people to isolate, you can increase or even remove the cap and get people home.</para>
<para>In February this year Adam Bandt and I wrote to the Prime Minister. We wrote about the devastating stories we have heard and the awful situations that people are facing in countries around the world. As part of that we called upon the Commonwealth to fund and to build more quarantine capacity. Our joint letter said: 'Prime Minister, to address this crisis we need more quarantine places. We welcome the steps taken by state governments to provide more places, but the Commonwealth must do more.' When he wrote back, the Prime Minister's letter said, 'The government is doing everything it can to help Australians who have faced difficulty returning, especially those who are the most vulnerable.' Of course we now know that this was not true. Imagine writing in February 2021 that the government is doing everything it can to help Australians who are stranded overseas. The audacity of telling the Australian public that when, in fact, the Prime Minister has failed comprehensively on the two jobs that would have made a difference. In June this year the Australian government proposed three new quarantine facilities. A year and a half into this pandemic and the Liberal Party finally started work on a plan—not that they finished developing the quarantine facilities, not that they started taking extra people into these facilities; no, they just put out a statement that they had a plan. Like so much of Prime Minister Morrison's government, the spin is loud and blustery, but when it comes to meaningful action it is too little and too late.</para>
<para>My office has heard from Australians around the world who are stranded overseas, and every day my staff members are working to support these people. We've tried as much as we can to elevate their voices so that we can make sure that the most vulnerable are getting the support they need. But it's incredibly hard when there's a quarantine bottleneck because Prime Minister Morrison has refused to act. We have heard from and continue to hear daily from people who are unable to enter Australia, despite being crucial carers for elderly family members in Australia; from people who are in incredibly vulnerable situations with really significant strains on their mental health; from people who planned to return and had wrapped up their jobs, only to have a flight cancellation throw out their plans, leaving them incredibly vulnerable. Why are there so many people who clearly meet the criteria of compassionate and compelling circumstances unable to return to Australia?</para>
<para>Australia owes a basic duty of care to its citizens, and that includes protecting their basic human rights, including the right to return to Australia. More quarantine facilities could have made that happen. But, instead, their return has been stymied by the failure of our Prime Minister on quarantine facilities. So to all those people stranded around the world, desperately trying to return to Australia: we see you, we hear you and we will keep working to make your voices heard in the Australian parliament and get you home as soon as we can. Today, when we are debating this bill for a level of support to help Australians get through this pandemic, we think of those people who are stranded overseas and what is not happening to get them home.</para>
<para>I also want to mention the many people who are not Australian citizens who have also been unable to return to Australia. Many have worked here for years and they have family here. But, because of the callous cruelty that the Liberal Party shows to so many people, they have been left in limbo for months and, in some cases, more than a year. The failure of Prime Minister Morrison's approach to building Commonwealth quarantine facilities shows in relation to the many people who clearly qualify for the priority migration skilled occupation list who have had their applications denied. It also shows in the incredibly harsh conditions that have been placed on people in India, compared to the lesser restrictions placed on people travelling from other countries. We need genuine action from our government to build the quarantine facilities that should have been finished months ago so that those around the world who are so desperate to return to Australia and be reunited with family can do so.</para>
<para>As we talk about the impacts of COVID-19, it's important that Australia actually look beyond our borders and do everything we can for our regional neighbours. Here is another big gap in the government's response to COVID—because other countries around the world are facing much bigger challenges than we are. I particularly want to mention the impact of COVID-19 on young people in the Pacific. I met with some wonderful young folk from Oaktree yesterday, who told me about the complex issues faced by young people in our region. When 50 per cent of the global population is under the age of 30, and nine out of 10 people live in countries classified as developing, the Indo-Pacific is experiencing a 'youth bulge', with 1.7 billion young people under the age of 25. Those young people are facing an increasing set of really complex challenges. Many face unemployment, or they work in insecure or informal employment. And that's before we start talking about the compounding impacts of the pandemic and the climate emergency that we face. We know, of course, that young people, because of that work in insecure employment, can be at greater risk of exposure to COVID-19 in some ways. Beyond that, the lockdowns have impacted their incomes, their ability to access education and their mental health. So many of these young people have had their schooling massively disrupted through the pandemic, and they're having to cope with COVID ripping through their communities, killing thousands of people and infecting millions, with vastly inadequate health facilities and limited access to vaccines.</para>
<para>So we call upon the Australian government. There are steps forward that the Greens are supporting in this bill, but it is not enough. There is so much more that needs to be done. We call on the government to take more meaningful action and, in particular, to support young people across the Indo-Pacific. That should include significantly increasing our aid budget, to much higher levels. That would ensure that we are providing development assistance to countries across the region and providing support to young people who have been impacted by this pandemic. It's not just in their interest; it's also in our interest, as Australia, to support the wellbeing of people across the region, to support these countries in dealing with the pandemic and not to foment unrest in those countries.</para>
<para>So the Australian government should be providing much more support for COVAX, which we've called for repeatedly for months now, to ensure that vaccines are available as widely as possible. It must also take action to advocate for the TRIPS waiver so that vaccines can be produced at lower prices and be more readily available. This bill provides a small level of the help and support needed in Australia, but locally and globally the Australian government can do more, and it must. We are here facing a global pandemic. There are choices to be made, and the choices that need to be made are ones that support the community and say, 'This is where resources are needed.' We should not be talking about more support for the big end of town, for billionaires, with massive tax cuts putting billions more dollars in the pockets of the already extraordinarily well-off. We should not be talking about handing out subsidies to our fossil fuel industries, who do not need them. We should not be having rorts that provide facilities that aren't required in decisions that are being made purely on the basis of politics. What we should have is a government that looks at what the needs of the community are, sees that there is a need there and can take action. This bill is a small start. It's a little bit of what we could be doing. But so much more is needed, and I urge this government to take that action so we can build a healthy, prosperous and sustainable Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator O'NEILL</name>
    <name.id>140651</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak as a senator for the great state of New South Wales, after six weeks in lockdown, and I want to put on the record some of the challenges that are facing businesses who desperately need assistance. Today I received correspondence from a company that describes itself as a 63-year-old commercial construction business headquartered in Albury, with additional offices in Orange and Ulladulla. It's a very significant employer. They talk about the construction industry and how that's been shut down. All of this goes to the government's failure to do those two critical jobs of government: to plan a proper form of quarantine that wouldn't leak on at least 28 occasions, and to provide proper vaccination. Companies like Zauner, and companies right across the Central Coast that suffered in last year's lockdown, have had a 45 per cent loss of revenue over the first two weeks of the lockdown in New South Wales. They faced a 23 per cent loss last year and 48 per cent after two months. Now they're down 45 per cent in this year alone. So the impact on business is absolutely enormous.</para>
<para>In Sydney right now, there are 286 people who are in hospital. We've had 17 deaths. I just want to put on record how distressing it is for me, as a mother of three 20-somethings, to think about what the family of the 27-year-old person who died in New South Wales is going through now and how entirely preventable this illness could be if there were access to the vaccines—if the government had acted.</para>
<para>We're discussing, in the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021, a response to the economic impact, but the economic impact is not separate from our lives. It's not separate from the illness. It's not separate from the mental health challenges. It's not separate from the identity issues that people are struggling with.</para>
<para>In the LGAs of Campbelltown, Blacktown, Canterbury Bankstown, Cumberland, Fairfield, Georges River, Liverpool and Parramatta, huge numbers of Australians who have ABNs, who are hardworking tradies—blue-collar workers who cannot work from home—are stuck in their homes. Many of them are facing the challenge of being unable to feed their families. They are looking to this Liberal-National government to respond to their challenges.</para>
<para>The government has come forward with a few different plans that carved out businesses and put some back in. They said they couldn't do anything; they couldn't help you if you didn't first spend your $10,000 in the bank. Then they waived that. There are so many changes. So many people who are from non-English-speaking backgrounds or for whom literacy is not their strong suit, but who are great workers, are struggling not only to understand the health orders and directions that keep changing but to participate in the scheme that the government has constructed. There is some money. It's coming through, but it's not working in the way that we need it to work, and not in a timely way.</para>
<para>I also want to quickly indicate that critical to getting the messages out in these eight LGAs in total lockdown in Sydney are the churches and the faith leaders from all of the faiths. They are out there trying to do their best to support the people in their communities. They are offering spiritual nourishment and mental health support, and they're providing physical support through charities that are associated with them. I just want people to know that, while the government have provided some financial support, at the same time they are trying to put through regulations with regard to charities. The Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission amendment is going to massively limit and impact all of the communities of faith who practise charitable works in our community. The government are saying, 'We want your help.' They are going to communities of faith. At the same time as they're doing that, they are actually constructing regulations that will massively limit what great Australian charities attached to so many religions are doing in the community. Again, that is an indication of what the government says and what it does, and how all the things that it says it's doing don't match up with what it actually does.</para>
<para>So I warn people in communities of faith to protect those communities, to stand up and to say to the government, 'We need to look after one another right now, so don't attack our faith community and don't attack the charities that we desperately need in the middle of this enormous crisis'—the COVID-19 crisis, now into 2021, that is doing such damage to families, communities and businesses right across this country but particularly to those people from New South Wales in Campbelltown, Blacktown, Canterbury Bankstown, Cumberland, Fairfield, Georges River, Liverpool and Parramatta, and, of course, on the Central Coast, in the Blue Mountains and at Shellharbour down around Wollongong, where they're so captured by the chaos of the failure of the Liberal-National Party government in New South Wales, in concert with this federal government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator FARUQI</name>
    <name.id>250362</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I'm speaking from my home in lockdown, as greater Sydney has entered its sixth week of lockdown. Millions of people are under stay-at-home orders as the virus circulates in our community Tragically, people are dying because vaccinations haven't been provided even to essential workers who have to leave home and are expected to stoically put their health and that of their families at risk. It was heartbreaking to hear today of the death of 27-year-old Aude Alaskar, who collapsed in his Warwick Farm unit. My deepest condolences go to his wife, family and friends, and to those of others who have passed due to COVID-19. It has also been weeks of anguish for people who have been unable to see their loved ones and are under immense financial and health stress.</para>
<para>All of this could have been avoided if the Morrison government had just done their job. Our vaccination rates are very low compared to other OECD countries, thanks to the completely botched-up rollout by the Prime Minister and his government. We simply cannot expect to return to any semblance of normal life any time soon, unless we change course immediately and drastically.</para>
<para>I do really want to thank people, especially people in South-West and Western Sydney, who have turned up in droves to get tested and vaccinated. We have seen some of the highest numbers of tests ever conducted, and the rates of first doses of vaccinations are going up. This is despite the lack of testing facilities and the misinformation about vaccines spread and cultivated by politicians.</para>
<para>This government has time and again failed to acknowledge the depth of the economic hardship that comes with COVID lockdowns. We know that millions of people, especially those left behind by this government, have had to endure this pandemic in poverty. They are being pushed further into poverty with these repeated lockdowns. Yet we have another bandaid bill in front of us. This is pretty appalling and shameful for a country as rich as Australia, where billionaires and the wealthiest are accumulating wealth because the Liberals and, disappointingly, Labor are handing them more and more while everyone else has less and less.</para>
<para>It's now four times that the government have attempted to replace JobKeeper with something else, which has always been inferior. Instead of simply reintroducing JobKeeper and the coronavirus supplement, here we are again with the government trying to come up with yet another version of payments, trying to do the bare minimum it can get away with. We will not let it get away with this.</para>
<para>Millions of casual workers in the higher education sector, artists, small businesses, construction workers and people in insecure work are suffering. We need JobKeeper 2.0 where millions of casuals and others on temporary visas are not left behind. People doing it tough need economic certainty and economic security. We need much faster vaccinations so people can move forward with their lives. Raise the rate and bring JobSeeker back above the poverty line so people can live with some sort of security in these incredibly difficult times. The government has completely failed on the vaccine rollout and is now failing in its responsibility to provide relief for the immense economic hardship that people are facing, especially in my home state of New South Wales and particularly in Greater Sydney, where we are still in hard lockdown and life has come to a standstill.</para>
<para>We support this bill, but it isn't enough. Surely you two, even with your new Liberal hats permanently on, can see the deep inequalities that have been starkly exposed and heightened by the pandemic. Indeed some of the measures initiated by the Morrison government last year, such as free child care, moratoriums on evictions and rent rises and raising the rate of income support above the poverty line, were tacit acknowledgment of the failures of a system built on profit-making privatisation. We know what needs to be done: income support that includes all workers, raising the rate of JobSeeker above the poverty line, expanding the public service sector across the board and making essential services like health and education universal and free. We need to head towards a society which has the wellbeing and welfare of all people at heart.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to support the comments and contributions made by my Greens colleagues in relation to this bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021, and I pay tribute to Senator Faruqi, who has so eloquently spoken about the realities facing people in lockdown right now in Sydney. I'm sorry you are not here with us, Senator Faruqi, but thank you for representing your constituents as well as you can from there at home. I say to all of our friends and loved ones in Greater Sydney and in the rest of New South Wales right now, and those in Queensland, as a South Australian I am really sorry you are continuing to have to go through this.</para>
<para>I'm really sorry for those in industries that have been hardest hit by the pandemic—the arts industry, the entertainment industry, hospitality and tourism—that government support has really waned throughout this pandemic over the last 12 to 18 months. For so long arts and entertainment workers, for example, were left out in the cold. They got nothing until months and months after others. And then the government prematurely stopped JobKeeper well before there was any horizon for arts and entertainment workers.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Van interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm speaking about the hardship of people in lockdown, those who have lost their jobs, and all I can hear is Senator Van mouthing off aggressively. I just want to make it clear to everybody listening that this is what this senator thinks of your hardship.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Van interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>281558</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Van! Please continue, Senator Hanson-Young.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HANSON-YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>I0U</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm speaking about those who have not been able to access enough government support to get them through what has been a torrid and awful time, those who have lost jobs and work, and the many who have lost hope of really ever being able to go back into sectors like the arts or entertainment. I'm speaking about many of the tourism operators, who are just pulling their hair out, wondering why their industry never got a specific support package.</para>
<para>I'm glad that we're seeing support on the table now for a number of people, organisations, businesses and workers who are currently in lockdown in Sydney and Queensland, but there are so many more who still have nothing. It's time for the government to really understand and acknowledge that, unless we inject proper support—particularly into the arts and entertainment and tourism sectors—we are going to lose an entire generation of artists, creatives and workers in those sectors. They're sectors that are intertwined. They rely on each other, and they've had such a massive blow. JobKeeper should never have been ripped away from those industries and workers in the first place. They need industry-specific support, and those workers need support as well. Tourism operators and artists in South Australia, WA, Victoria, Tasmania or the Northern Territory right now may not be in lockdown, but their business has been destroyed. There is no work. People can't travel.</para>
<para>We're all working hard together to defeat this virus, to keep our community protected and healthy. We're in this together, except that some people, those who work in those industries, have been left out in the cold. I urge the Prime Minister and his government to reconsider the support and the level of support that they are offering those in the industries hardest hit. The HomeBuilder program for the construction industry was an uncapped program. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent keeping that industry afloat and putting money into the pockets of workers and businesses, but the arts and entertainment industry got nothing like that. They got a small, capped program that was oversubscribed, and then everybody was kicked off JobKeeper.</para>
<para>There is a long way to go in relation to helping people deal with this, and, without a proper vaccine rollout or fixing hotel quarantine, this is going to continue for some time. We've got members within the Prime Minister's own government actively undermining vaccination and the health response. What message does that send to workers who have lost their jobs, whether it was in the last week, the last fortnight or over the last 18 months? I think it's incredibly selfish of those members, in this place or the other. We haven't lost our jobs. We haven't taken a pay cut, as politicians. I think it's incredibly selfish of members in this place or the other to advocate dangerous positions that undermine the very response that is being asked of every other Australian in order to get through this, despite so many people losing their jobs, losing hours or losing money and so many businesses closing. When Mr George Christensen tells people not to get vaccinated, what does that say to the tourism operator in Queensland whose business is now dead in the water, the artist who is struggling to get their next gig and has no idea when that will happen or the mum who is doing as many shifts as she can at the local cafe to make sure she can afford the uniforms and the school camps? Mr George Christensen, Senator Rennick, Mr Craig Kelly, Alan Jones and Sky News are all making it much harder for these people to get back up on their feet. It's insulting. Anyway, I'm glad we're seeing more support being put on the table, but it's far short of what is needed.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUGHES</name>
    <name.id>273828</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have been listening this afternoon and I heard 'bandaid solution' and 'bring back JobKeeper' thrown around. Those opposite—those sitting at home on the screens and those sitting to my right—just don't get it. This is a pandemic no-one has ever seen before—it's a one-in-a hundred-year event. The Morrison government has continued to focus on lives and livelihoods. This means we don't set and forget how we roll out financial assistance to businesses and individuals. The pandemic has changed and we've seen situations evolve.</para>
<para>I want to spend a little bit of time talking about the persistent call for JobKeeper to be returned. We heard from those opposite when JobKeeper ended that the world was going to end and that we were going to fall off an economic cliff. That just didn't happen. In fact, we saw more Australians in work than pre the pandemic. You would think that by now they might have figured out that they got it wrong about JobKeeper then, but they have got it wrong again now.</para>
<para>I want to draw attention to Mr Paul Waterson's comments. He discussed the assistance that has been given to his business, Australian Venue Co. or AVC. They own a number of hospitality venues, particularly pubs, across Australia. He said that what the Morrison government is proposing now to assist workers—which has direct payments to workers from the Commonwealth, as opposed to the JobKeeper program, which was administered by the business—is all the best parts of JobKeeper with improvements. The improvements include those workers on visas who previously didn't qualify now being able to access some assistance.</para>
<para>This isn't a national lockdown; it isn't happening the same in every state across the country. I'm a senator from New South Wales and I know how tough it is for everybody at home in Greater Sydney at the moment. AVC wouldn't have been able to access JobKeeper because, whilst some of their venues are shut at the moment in Sydney, South Australia and Queensland, they not shut in the other states and, therefore, the group's revenue would not be seen to decline enough to allow them access to the previous JobKeeper payment. By modifying things, being a bit adaptable, looking at how we can change and make things better, learning, moving forward and continuing to develop, we've a system that will provide assistance to individuals who are impacted, not businesses that are national groups.</para>
<para>Whilst 2,000 of AVC's 5,400 workers have been stood down, they're maintaining significant contact with them. One of the claims is that JobKeeper was allowing bosses to stay connected to their employees. What a lot of businesses have discovered, particularly in the post-lockdown economic bounce that we seem to see happen quite regularly, is that they were struggling to find workers. So businesses are doing everything that they can to remain connected to their staff. If you look at a company like AVC, which is in one of the most impacted areas—hospitality and pubs had no vertical imbibing, square-limit limitations and all of those things that were having impacts across this industry—what they're doing is looking at training for their staff. They're remaining connected to them and keeping training programs going. They know this will end, things will change and things will open back up again, and they want to make sure that they still have access to those staff and that they're still connected to them. Perhaps they've even taken the opportunity to grow their staff, develop their skills and look at ways that will best serve them to open up as quickly as possible when they can. They're keeping that connection with their staff.</para>
<para>Admittedly, this is with a larger organisation, but businesses have offered staff an incentive. Pubs and hospitality can have quite a transient workforce. It tends to be quite a young workforce. Some businesses are topping up their pay to 80 per cent of what it would normally be. So staff are currently not earning as much money as they normally do, but if they're still with the company at the end of January—when, hopefully, we'll all be back open again and can enjoy, particularly, the fabulous Sydney summer—once these venues reopen and staff go back to work, they don't have to pay the money back. Businesses are continuing to invest in their staff as best they can, connecting with their staff and making sure that those employee-employer connections are remaining strong.</para>
<para>As I said at the beginning, this is about focusing on lives and livelihoods. People, particularly on the opposite side, are calling out about the vaccine and the vaccine rollout, but it's the vaccine hesitancy that half of you lot have been responsible for that is causing the problems. You consistently cling to this. You've got chief health officers in states—I know our friend is up there in Queensland, that abomination! The comments that she makes are just out of control. No wonder vaccine hesitancy in Queensland is the highest across the country. What an embarrassment! The fact that the Premier wants to promote this woman—maybe we should get her up there as soon as possible so she can stop giving health advice, because I can tell you that's not her strong suit. This is where we're seeing the vaccine hesitancy come in. People are vaccine shopping. The best vaccine you can get is the one that's available—go and get it. Get your arm out and get that jab. There are plenty of options to do it.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Pratt interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUGHES</name>
    <name.id>273828</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Senator Pratt, if you're struggling to find a vaccine, I've put together a COVID page on my website that has both state and federal booking systems. It's got some actual information, not Dr York's interpretation but actual information from real scientists who have got some experience in haematology and who understand how viruses and vaccines work. We've put the information together for them so people can go to my website—have a look, Senator Pratt, it's holliehughes.com.au—and we've got all the booking systems there. The booking systems include the GP rollout.</para>
<para>I know this must be such a blow to you, because you consistently need to talk things down—I can't imagine how much the Olympics are disappointing you, at the moment, because we're just going so well. The fact that you'd have to cheer Australia on at any point might kill you!</para>
<para>But if you go to my website you can have a look at all the booking systems. I can show you. I'm happy to walk you through it. A couple of them there actually cover WA. You can go on there and have a look and see where the GPs are. Jimmy Rees could give Premier McGowan's press conferences—'Shut the borders!' That's all we ever get from Premier McGowan. The fact that his national cabinet walks out and agrees with the Prime Minister, and then says, 'We're going to do it on our own terms,' is a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace. This sort of contribution to the conversation, if it doesn't stop—this is a national conversation, and these premiers need to start putting them and their CHOs back in their boxes. Stop spreading vaccine hesitation and start encouraging people to get it. Go and make it easier for to go and get into that.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Pratt interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUGHES</name>
    <name.id>273828</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Lockdown—you guys will lock down when someone sneezes. It's just insanity. It's embarrassing, having lived in WA for a while. Guys, just secede already, if that's what you think.</para>
<para>This vaccine hesitation, picking a vaccine: I still want to know if anyone who had their flu shot this year can tell me what the brand it was. Anyone know? I went to PNG a couple of years ago. I couldn't tell you what brand any of those vaccines were, you know, but got a flu vax, got a Pfizer, got an AstraZeneca depending on what you want. But it's all there and available. You guys just can't stand it. You cannot bear that we've now hit 12 million doses. You can't stand that yesterday was a record day of doses, of over 200,000. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Get on team Australia. Get out there and encourage constituents. Go and encourage people to have their vaccine shots. I'll send you a link, Senator Pratt. You can check out the vaccination booking systems. Do you know the great thing about them—what we've seen when we've recommended people to them—is they've actually been able to get a vaccine within two days, sometimes faster.</para>
<para>But I digress. We were talking not only about vaccine hesitation but how good it is now for people to be able to go and access these vaccines when they're not shopping around and listening to Dr York, of all people. Just have Nick Coatsworth on. At least he knows what he's talking about. The guy's got some sort of comprehension of what's going to be involved in this process, but, you know, here we are.</para>
<para>This government is focused on actually providing benefits and financial assistance to individuals. So when we want to talk about the times, I just said you can get a vaccination within a couple of days. One of the things that we've learnt since we introduced this new scheme for people to get assistance is that sometimes the money is in their banks within 40 minutes. By cutting out that visit that they were going through. It's going straight into their bank account in 40 minutes. Can you imagine this lot on the other side? They wouldn't have a system up that you could have it in the bank by 40 minutes. Can I just pop in, because I do think it's gold, the 300 buck cash incentive this week. That's like cash for clunkers, off we go again. Let's get the pink batts and the school halls happening—shall we?—the cash splash, the cheques to dead people. Here we go again in the way they want to address this.</para>
<para class="italic">Senator Chisholm interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUGHES</name>
    <name.id>273828</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's hilarious. We hear from those opposite: 'Bring back JobKeeper. We need JobKeeper. Bring it back.' Then we get Senator Chisolm, particularly, and a couple of the others who like to get up and have a bit of a whinge. They're upset because Harvey Norman accessed JobKeeper. Guess what. The Australia Club accessed JobKeeper, heaven forbid. They need to pay it back. Don't worry about the 300 bucks. Let's give it to Gina Rinehart. I'm pretty sure Katie Page—they'd all love their 300 bucks. So let's just splash that cash around for absolutely no—no targeting, just chuck it out there and see how we go.</para>
<para>But no. These guys: no consistency, no real comprehension of how things work, of how people actually want real support delivered to them in a timely fashion. I reckon in anyone's book, 40 minutes from being on Centrelink into your bank account is a pretty good effort. But you won't hear a word over there: talk it all down, negative, negative, negative. Let's talk about the graphs, the fact that we're at the bottom—the bottom of the death tally, my friends. The bottom of the death tally, but we won't ever say that. Don't worry about it. We won't acknowledge the lower end, you know—bottom of the death tally</para>
<para>Opposition senators interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator HUGHES</name>
    <name.id>273828</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>But, you know, here we are again. I mean these guys obviously didn't pay much attention in maths class, because they don't understand how to read these graphs or what's happening in them or what they actually mean. They just want to chuck the cash out wherever they can, to whoever doesn't need it for whatever they can think of. But one of the best vaccine-hesitancy people—I love this, it's because the opposition leader in his bid to make a point of difference from the member for Maribyrnong, who's out there cheering the AstraZeneca on—I love Mr Shorten's photos of him getting his AstraZeneca out there. At every media opportunity he's banging that leadership drum. All those ambitions are coming back through. But there he is, supporting AstraZeneca, supporting Australians, wanting them to get the jab. What does Mr Albanese do? What does the Opposition Leader do? He races out as soon as possible to find an antivaxx campaigner; some woman who—by the way, her tweet today was just gold. If anyone hasn't seen it, go have a look; it's a cracker. He is out of time. He is out of ideas. I don't think she was supposed to be a newly endorsed Labor candidate— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>95</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forestry</title>
          <page.no>95</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DAVEY</name>
    <name.id>281697</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The <inline font-style="italic">Guardian</inline> is reporting today that international charity Oxfam has warned that reforestation , or a f forestation , as a mechanism to tackle climate change risks global food security and will drive up food prices, particularly in developing nations. The report, <inline font-style="italic">Tightening the net: the implications of net zero climate targets for land and food equity</inline> , says planting even a fraction of the area needed to offset global greenhouse gas emissions would encroach on land needed to grow crops to feed a growing population. According to Nafkote Dabi, the climate policy lead at Oxfam, it is difficult to tell how much land would be required for offsets, as governments have not been transparent in how they will meet net zero targets.</para>
<para>This is the point that the Nationals have been trying to make. We need to understand how we're going to achieve net zero without unintended consequences. We need to understand the methodology of the accounting. I n Australia w e've already seen agricultural land locked up as native vegetation tracts to meet emissions reduction targets. Meanwhile, this ignores the crucial role that Australian agriculture and forestry can play in helping us as a nation to sequester carbon and reduce e missions. The Oxfam analysis found that nature based solutions that focused on managed forestry, agroforestry, pasture and soil management and crop lands are better options to allow people to produce food while sequestering carbon.</para>
<para>When we talk climate change in agriculture, we must acknowledge the hard lifting that our farmers have done and are doing. The meat industry has done extensive research on reducing emissions from livestock by changing diets. The pork industry has world-leading examples of methane-to-power conversion. Every commodity is looking at ways to do their bit. So , too , our forestry industry should be applauded rather than lambasted. Today, the taxpayer funded New South Wales Environmental Defenders Office have announced they're taking the forestry industry in New South Wales to court to argue agains t regional forestry agreements.</para>
<para>It is well known that trees absorb carbon, particularly in the earlier growth phases. By harvesting that timber, you capture that carbon. By using that timber for wood products, furniture, timber housing frames and the like, you capture that carbon forever. The alternative, to plant a tree and walk away, doesn't give you the opportunity to replant, regenerate and restart the cycle. Planting trees and walking away only captures carbon to a point. The trees absorb carbon during their younger years, plateau later in life and then, later still, start to release carbon. And the land is locked up for good. It doesn't produce anything that helps humankind so far as food and fibre. The Australian forest industry has over 125 million hectares under plantation at the moment. That makes us the world's seventh-largest forested nation. But only 78,000 hectares, or 0.06 per cent, is harvested for timber production in any one year. That leaves the rest of it all there absorbing carbon. But, instead of celebrating this sustainable green industry, the Greens and others want to curtail it, just like they do with our agriculture.</para>
<para>Regarding the EDO case in New South Wales, the Federal Court has already sensibly rejected similar claims in Tasmania and Victoria. But these constant legal challenges, this environmental lawfare, are costing the industry billions and diverting attention away from having them improve practices and increase sustainability. We have to stop this lawfare. We've got to stop branding our farmers and foresters as environmental vandals and embrace the vital role they will play in both helping us meet our emissions reduction targets and feeding our nation and the world. We need to give our businesses and farmers longer-term certainty. We need to back our industries, back the families that work in forestry, back our farmers and back our communities.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Children's Television Production</title>
          <page.no>96</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator CAROL BROWN</name>
    <name.id>F49</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to address the need for urgent support for small production companies in our screen industry. I'm referring especially to those involved in children's television production. Despite proposing a harmonised Australian screen content quota, the government has not introduced an Australian local content obligation for streaming services, four years after the government's Australian children's screen content review. In June, the Morrison Liberal government even tried to pass legislation which would have halved the 10 per cent of Australian content expenditure requirement for subscription TV services like Foxtel. That cut to screen content requirements was criticised by the Senate Environment and Communications Committee, including by the government's own senators on the committee. Fortunately, that part of the bill was killed off by a Labor amendment in the Senate. This all highlights the Morrison Liberal government's woeful record on supporting Australian screen content. That track record involves watering down children's content sub quotas for free-to-air broadcasters.</para>
<para>Blue Rocket Productions is an international children's content powerhouse but a small production company based in my home state of Tasmania. It is a multi-award winning animation studio. Blue Rocket has been in business for 22 years sending quality local children's content across the country and around the whole world. They have created 23 children's TV series and a feature film. Blue Rocket describes the decision to cut children's content sub quotas by saying, 'In September 2020 the federal government cancelled the Australians children's quotas for the commercial free-to-air-broadcaster, saving them 0.745 per cent of their Australian production expenditure, putting thousands of people out of work and jeopardising dozens of production companies'.</para>
<para>Without sub quotas for children's content for free-to-air television, the Morrison Liberal government wrongly assumes commercial interests will pick up the pieces. This will not happen, as they well know, because their own media reform green paper told them:</para>
<quote><para class="block">However, due to Australia’s small market, this content can be financially risky to produce, with costs often not able to be recouped in the domestic market.</para></quote>
<para>So there it is. Our broadcasters cannot be relied on to produce enough quality local screen content without a compulsory sub quota being in place. The sub quota support is what helps make our children's television the international and local success it is.</para>
<para>My Tasmanian colleagues and I met with David Gurney from Blue Rocket and other stakeholders to discuss the impact the removal of the sub quota is having. Earlier this year, Mr Gurney also discussed his concern with <inline font-style="italic">The</inline><inline font-style="italic">Mercury</inline> newspaper. At the time, he said the pandemic has had an impact but the decision of the Morrison Liberal government has had a greater impact. A series Blue Rocket has been preparing for four years has been abandoned as a direct result of the sub quota's cut. Blue Rocket, after 22 successful years, is suddenly down from 40 to seven employees. David Gurney said, 'I think that Blue Rocket, along with about 30 other independent children's production companies, has been placed in a very precarious position by the federal government, extraordinary at a time when employment is so desperately needed in Australia.'</para>
<para>Nick, who is 44 and who has worked for Blue Rocket for 23 years had this to say, 'Removing the quotas has cut my family off at the knees and placed us all under significant financial stress. I don't know if we will recover from it.' These are real people, these are real jobs, and this is a short-sighted and completely unnecessary decision by the Morrison Liberal government. As I was saying, Blue Rocket has gone from 40 employees down to seven. Today I have been informed Blue Rocket has dropped to one employee; that's Mr Gurney himself. Today I've also been informed the successful business, Blue Rocket, will close in a matter of weeks.</para>
<para>The Morrison Liberal government has undermined an otherwise successful industry for no good. I will finish by again quoting Mr Gurney, who said, 'Our kids production sector has flatlined, with thousands of people out of work and many companies put in severe jeopardy thanks to the government's ill-informed and poorly considered reforms. Has the federal government got a crack in its motherboard? Seriously, this is simply appalling and beyond disappointing.'</para>
<para>I call on the government to recognise and acknowledge the impact their short-sighted decision-making is having on our creative industries and on the hardworking individuals employed by them. I implore the government to do something to save this industry.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Support</title>
          <page.no>97</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator PATRICK</name>
    <name.id>144292</name.id>
    <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise tonight to speak about child support. Child support is always a difficult topic. It normally involves parents and children. These are parents who perhaps can't agree on an approach moving forward to make sure children are supported. My experience is that, whatever is determined by the Child Support Agency, no-one is ever happy. That's because there is emotion involved and there are different perspectives involved. The Child Support Agency does a useful job in at least trying to find some point at which there is not too much disagreement or too much unhappiness and the children are looked after.</para>
<para>The way child support is calculated—some parents just agree that a particular amount is paid between the two parents, and others have special circumstances and there are special processes. But the bulk of Australians have the child support formula applied to them. That formula involves considering the income of the father, the income of the mother, the number of children and how much time each parent spends caring for the children. It is basically a formula where you put the numbers in and it pops out and says that one of the parents has to pay this and the other parent has to pay that—and therefore there will be some difference that is paid. It might end up with a father paying a mother or vice versa.</para>
<para>It is fair to say that 90 per cent of child support payees are women. But we should try to keep the gender out of this because it's about parents. I've indicated that the child support formula involves an understanding of the salaries on both sides. How does the Child Support Agency get those salaries? They rely on tax returns from the mother and the father. Unfortunately, we have the situation in Australia that parents are not lodging their tax returns. It is actually unlawful to not lodge a tax return. This year, where we have experienced COVID, 213,000 Child Support Agency clients have not lodged their tax return within the year, 101,000 are two years late, 152,000 are somewhere between three and five years late and 130,000 are six to 10 years late.</para>
<para>Parents not lodging their tax returns means the formula is wrong, the amount that is being paid by one parent to the other to support children is wrong. First, we've got to make sure the tax office enforces the law, that people are made to lodge their tax returns on time so we get the correct answer. But some people may well be gaming the system. They get a job, they get a pay rise, they get a promotion and, over time, their salary builds up. They don't lodge their tax returns, and the Child Support Agency just increments their salary in accordance with CPI. You might have a large salary earner who ends up paying far less child support than what is proper. We need to remedy that.</para>
<para>I've asked for this on several occasions and I have been talking to Senator Ruston. If child support payees don't want to comply with the law and lodge their tax returns, we need to put in place a punitive measure—and the same goes for people who are receiving money, because their salary affects the outcome. We have to have a punitive remedy. Maybe we'll have to pay twice as much child support or three times as much child support. But we cannot have the situation continue as it stands, because children are missing out on proper support.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Queensland</title>
          <page.no>98</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator GREEN</name>
    <name.id>259819</name.id>
    <electorate>Queensland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] I'm very pleased to be joining the Senate tonight from Cairns. Unfortunately, though, we are facing our own delta outbreak. This week millions of Queenslanders from the Gold Coast, Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast are in lockdown in South-East Queensland. Many people in regional Queensland are also isolating at home, and in Cairns we have families across the region who are isolating at home and getting tested to prevent the spread of the delta strain. We have one confirmed case in Cairns as of today, a maritime pilot who tested positive even though he was fully vaccinated. As a result a number of local locations are now listed as exposure sites. It is very important for us to keep Cairns COVID-free. Ten per cent of the Cairns population is Indigenous. Cairns is also the gateway to the cape and the Torres Strait. An outbreak in those communities would be catastrophic. We simply cannot risk it. As senators are fully aware, Cairns and Far North Queensland have been absolutely smashed economically by COVID-19. An outbreak of the delta variant here in Far North Queensland would be the final straw for so many of our businesses.</para>
<para>Australians have been plunged into uncertainty and disruption because of a leaky quarantine system and a slow vaccine rollout. Scott Morrison had two jobs this year: a speedy and effective rollout of the vaccine and quarantine. He has failed at both, and now Far North Queenslanders are paying the price. Australia has seen 27 leaks from hotel quarantine, numerous lockdowns across the country, families separated from loved ones, and yet it's still not clear what it will take to get Scott Morrison to step up and get the job done. This is a Prime Minister who refuses to take responsibility. He said that it wasn't a race, but it has always been a race for people living in Far North Queensland and remote Far North Queensland, up through the cape and the Torres Strait. It has always been a race for us to get this right. But unfortunately in the Cairns region only 21 per cent of people aged over 15 have been fully vaccinated, and now we face the dire consequences of a delta strain outbreak in a community that cannot afford it.</para>
<para>Lockdowns have been made necessary by Scott Morrison's failure on vaccines and quarantine, and they are costing the economy around $300 million each day. The economy is bleeding hundreds of millions of dollars each week because Scott Morrison hasn't done his job. This is the price that Australian workers and small businesses are paying for his incompetence, and there are no businesses that know this better than those of the people living in Far North Queensland. They know this because throughout this pandemic they have been hit over and over again by the economic impacts of lockdowns. This is what local business leaders are saying, and they are pleading for more support from the Morrison government. Patricia O'Neill from the Cairns Chamber of Commerce said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We're hearing from tourism operators they are losing between $3 million to $5 million a day. We have retailers reporting not a single transaction on their cash registers a day.</para></quote>
<para>Darren Barber from Wolf Lane Distillery said, 'We know this uncertainty is damaging to business confidence.' The CEO of Skyrail, a tourism attraction here in Cairns, Ken Chapman, said, 'We are now in the depths of the situation we had 12 months ago, but 12 months ago we had JobKeeper.' Mark Olsen from TTNQ said this only yesterday: 'Without visitation or without wage support, we will lose businesses. We won't lose them for one week or two week; we will lose them forever.'</para>
<para>Unfortunately what we know about this government, about Scott Morrison, is he does not take responsibility. He doesn't take responsibility for his stuff-ups, and now Far North Queenslanders are paying the price. There is no economic support from the Morrison government for these businesses and these workers. There is no wage subsidy. There is no economic support. Although they are not in a lockdown right now, they are locked out of the revenue that tourists bring to our town. Far North Queenslanders have been through it all this year and all last year. They are on their knees and this government is letting them down. It is a disgrace. The government needs to step up and do better.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Homelessness</title>
          <page.no>98</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator FARUQI</name>
    <name.id>250362</name.id>
    <electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Another week marking homelessness is another week marking lack of action by the government to reduce homelessness. People wait for over a decade to access public housing in some parts of Australia, while hundreds of thousands of people seek help from homelessness services each year. The last census showed us that over 100,000 people are without a home on any given night. We are now approaching another census, and homelessness and the housing crisis has just been growing.</para>
<para>We know women and children are disproportionately impacted by the lack of safe and security housing. Older women have been the fastest growing group of people experiencing homelessness. The COVID-19 pandemic has further deepened this crisis, with many thousands of women and children being forced to choose between returning to violent partners and becoming homeless. A recent report by the Everybody's Home campaign and Equity Economics revealed as many as 7,700 women a year are returning to violent partners and 9,120 women a year are being forced into homelessness because of a chronic shortage of affordable housing. What a terrifying choice these women are faced with and all because government after government has not only refused to build more social housing but also continued to defund essential crisis services.</para>
<para>Migrants and refugees are vastly overrepresented amongst people who are homeless. At least 15 per cent of people who were homeless on the last census night arrived in Australia in the previous five years and face disproportionate disadvantage. The Centre for Multicultural Youth in Victoria estimated that young people from refugee backgrounds are six to 10 times more likely to be at risk of homelessness than Australian born young people. These are damning statistics.</para>
<para>Millions of people are being robbed of housing security and housing affordability. This is nothing less than intergenerational theft. House prices have gone up over 20 per cent in the past year alone in Sydney, with house prices rising $1,000 a day at the moment. Canberra and Hobart are in a similar situation of house prices rising by 20 per cent. Over 10 per cent has been the rise in house prices in all major cities in Australia. The median house price in Sydney is now over $1.4 million and it's over $1 million in Melbourne.</para>
<para>This is not an accident. This is a deliberate policy choice by the government. Tax breaks like negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount have landed us in this mess. These generous breaks work for wealthy investors and property speculators, making it easier for someone to buy their fifth investment property than for someone to buy their first home to live in.</para>
<para>Yet, shamefully, we have now seen the Labor Party backtracking on its commitment to reform these tax breaks. Not too long ago Labor were calling out negative gearing and the CGT discount as tax subsidies that benefit the wealthiest Australians. So what exactly has changed? It's a cowardly and pathetic backflip. House prices and rents are skyrocketing and Labor is throwing fuel on the fire. There is now clear bipartisan consensus on entrenching housing inequality for generations. This is a betrayal of young people in particular, who have been locked out of secure housing due to these very policies that have turned an essential need such as housing into a game of market speculation. People are suffering and bearing the brunt of an unfair system, caught in the cycle of disadvantage.</para>
<para>It is not good enough to pass the buck on housing to states and territories. The federal government has a clear responsibility to ensure people's rights to shelter and safety are assured. The Greens will work to establish a federal housing trust to build one million public and social homes across Australia over 20 years. This is the scale of the building required to obliterate housing waiting lists and reduce homelessness.</para>
<para>Public housing shouldn't be just a safety net but an alternative to private rental or home ownership. We must wind back the tax rules that have turned housing into a speculator's game. The government needs to urgently and significantly increase baseline funding for homelessness services to ensure that no-one is turned away. The housing system exists as it does by design. It's time to change that design so homes are not commodities and speculative assets but a place to live in. Everyone deserves a safe and a secure home. We can and we must do better.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Immigration Detention</title>
          <page.no>99</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tasmania: Gutwein Government</title>
          <page.no>99</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
    <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This is going to be great! It's one that is completely unprompted and has no notes written for it at all and, in fact, no thought put into it! It is therefore coming from the heart. I want to spend tonight paying tribute to the Gutwein government in Tasmania for their handling of the COVID pandemic, because, just today, we found out that 50 per cent of the population has received their first dose of the vaccination, which is a great thing. It is something that is being managed in Tasmania quite well by that government, so I want to put on record my congratulations to that government but, more importantly, to the people of Tasmania who have volunteered to go out and roll up their sleeve and have the jab to protect other Tasmanians. I wonder if we're going to get some sound?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I think we have some sound.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Senator DUNIAM</name>
    <name.id>263418</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Just in conclusion, I just want to say how great it is in Tasmania to have Peter Gutwein in charge, because if it were anything else we would be in dire straits. What a wonderful night it is!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The PRESIDENT</name>
    <name.id>I0Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Senator Duniam. That was very kind of you.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Immigration Detention</title>
          <page.no>100</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Senator McCARTHY</name>
    <name.id>122087</name.id>
    <electorate>Northern Territory</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>[by video link] Seven refugees remain in detention in a Darwin airport hotel 522 days after they were taken there under Medevac legislation. That's 18 months in detention, since February last year, and, prior to that, seven years on Nauru—a total of 2,937 days in Australian detention. It is a national shame.</para>
<para>Recently when I visited the two families in the Darwin detention area. I spoke to them through a fence while they sat some five metres away and yelled their stories in desperation. It's entirely unclear why these families remain in detention in Darwin while other Medevac refugees have been released. They have been granted genuine refugee status by UNHCR and were deemed not to be a threat to the community when they were allowed into the country under the Medevac legislation. And the treatment they were brought here to receive by all accounts has not been given, and they continue to have to wait, confused, desperate, mentally exhausted and unwell, to learn of their fate. I was ashamed to see that our country would treat people in such a way.</para>
<para>Let me tell you a little bit about them. Afsaneh; her husband, Mojtaba; and her son, Behnam, are from Iran. Behnam was 16 when he first came to Australia and was put in immigration detention. He's now 24, having spent a large part of his life on Nauru. This family have been accepted for resettlements in the US, but are waiting on final health checks, which they need to fly to Sydney for. They're now facing delays due to COVID lockdowns in Sydney and they do not know when they will get there. I ask the question, though: why does this health check have to be done down there; why can it not be done here in Darwin? None of this has been explained to them. As I spoke to them, Afsaneh held a sign that said, 'I can't breathe. We aren't safe'. She told me, 'They are killing us slowly.' She said, 'Why not just kill me now? Instead they want us to suffer.'</para>
<para>The second family is Yaghoob, his wife Malekah and their adult children, Abbas and Hajar, both in their 30s. They are also from Iran. Abbas recently shared the following story on his Facebook page, which I will read to you. These are his words:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Listen up, I have a story to tell you. My name is Abbas and I'm 34 years old. I'm just like any man my age on most accounts. I like to spend time with my family and friends, watch movies and go to the gym. I would love to spend a summer in Paris to learn more about philosophy, poetry and politics. I also enjoy Russian literature and South American music and dance.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Unfortunately my life is different to most other 34 year old men because I have had almost nine years stolen from me. As an Arabic man, I had to leave my country . It was forbidden for us to celebrate our culture or even learn our language. If we were caught doing this we were brutally punished and abused by the government. My sister and I grew up living in fear and shame. When I was 25 years old, my parents, older sister and I came to Australia seeking safety and refuge. We looked forward to a beautiful future where we did not have to hide our culture.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Australian Government were not what we expected. They did not offer us safety, refuge or even a slither of compassion. Instead they sent us to a tiny little island in Tanzania. My family spent 7 years on Nauru. We were kept behind fences and treated like criminals.</para></quote>
<para>The kindness and compassion that is so desperately needed in these circumstances must be shown to these two families. I urge the Senate and the Australian parliament to look at the seven people here in the Darwin detention centre and not turn your backs on them.</para>
<para>There is considerable community concern in Darwin about how the Morrison government is treating these families, and the community are ready to welcome these families. I thank DASSAN, the Darwin Asylum Seeker Support and Advocacy Network, and all those involved with coordinating daily vigils. There have now been 183 days of vigils outside the hotel. I call on the Morrison government to release these families into the community while they await finalisation of resettlement visas to other countries. It's just the right thing to do.</para>
<para>Senate adjourned at 19:53</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
</hansard>