DOCUMENTS

2021-08-11 46 1 7 Senate 0 1

Wednesday, 11 August 2021

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Scott Ryan) took the chair at 09:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.

DOCUMENTS 1 DOCUMENTS Tabling 1 COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Meeting 1 09:31 The PRESIDENT I0Q I remind senators that the question may be put on any proposal at the request of any senator. There being none, we shall move on. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 1 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Closing the Gap 1 09:31 Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X South Australia I move: That the Senate take note of the Closing the Gap ministerial statement and the Commonwealth implementation plan. I rise today to acknowledge the Indigenous people of our country. We pay our respect to the Ngunawal people and all First Peoples and to their elders past, present and emerging. I acknowledge Indigenous Australians serving our country in a wide range of fields today. I acknowledge those Indigenous Australians in the Australian Defence Force, protecting Australians and advancing our interests. At this time of global challenge with this global pandemic I acknowledge those Indigenous Australians serving on the frontline of our medical professions and other fields of endeavour, keeping Australians safe and helping our nation through tough times. I also honour the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who serve in this parliament across both of our chambers: the Minister for Indigenous Australians, the shadow minister for Indigenous Australians and Senators Dodson, McCarthy, Lambie and Thorpe. We look forward to that number growing. As the Prime Minister has reflected upon in the other place, at the core of closing the gap is ensuring that every Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander boy and girl can grow up with the same opportunities and the same expectations as any other Australian child. They should have every opportunity to grow up proud of their culture and confident that it is accorded respect by their fellow Australians. Thirteen years ago the parliament rightly apologised to the stolen generations. As a new member of this parliament I remember it as a significant moment of great reckoning and a vital step towards reconciliation. As the Prime Minister said, in the nine years that have followed the Closing the Gap process, whilst with the best of intentions at heart, it has at times remained hard of hearing. We still thought we knew better. That is why our government brought together a new 10-year national partnership agreement, signed by all Australian governments, the Coalition of Peaks and the Australian Local Government Association. From that partnership the National Agreement on Closing the Gap was born. Last Thursday we made the promises of that agreement real with the presentation, as tabled, of the first Commonwealth implementation plan. This agreement holds the financial commitments, partnership, shared accountability and scope that form the most significant and comprehensive response to closing the gap that our government has ever provided. With this implementation plan we are making good on our commitment to do things differently, focusing on listening, learning, accountability, transparency and a genuine partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander stakeholders and organisations—a partnership built on mutual respect, dignity and, above all, trust. At the heart of the national agreement is who it empowers and what it inspires. In a significant departure from what we've done before, each of the states and territories and the Coalition of Peaks will be responsible for their own actions and their own plans. An annual Commonwealth progress report will be tabled around this same time every year. Similarly, the states and territories will separately deliver theirs, and all of us will reprioritise our investments to do things that we know will work and are working. To help us understand what the evidence says and our progress, the Productivity Commission will release an annual report on the outcomes and priority reforms. As well as the annual reports, the Productivity Commission will also present an independent review once every three years. After each report by the Productivity Commission, an independent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander led report will deepen the data and give us a picture of the change happening on the ground. The first Commonwealth Closing the Gap Implementation Plan, with more than $1 billion worth of new targeted measures, lays the foundation for the work ahead. The plan is an overview of Commonwealth actions to close the gap, aligned to the four priority reforms and the 17 socioeconomic outcomes set in the national agreement, including new target areas such as justice and Indigenous languages. The measures we're funding reflect a sharpened set of priorities. These are priorities that have been offered and agreed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples themselves. The first of these new priorities is to collaborate better by building better structures for genuine partnership and joint decision-making. The second priority is to build up Indigenous organisations, to empower community controlled sectors to do what they already do best—deliver the services that support closing the gap. Included in this implementation plan is $38.6 million for an Outcomes and Evidence Fund. It will support genuine co-design between government and Aboriginal controlled organisations and other local providers to deliver the best possible services for families and children. Our third priority area is about transforming government to help us understand in detail how our systems can, knowingly or otherwise, perpetuate racism, so as to ensure we can overcome it. We won't be able to close the gap without doing so. The last priority area of reform is about data. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations need to be able to collect, analyse and use their own data to meet their own needs. In this new plan, one measure has meant perhaps more than many others. That relates to the stolen generations, a shameful chapter in our national story. Last week, the Prime Minister announced that the Commonwealth is investing $378.6 million in a new scheme for stolen generations survivors who were removed as children from their families in former Commonwealth territories—in the Northern Territory and the Jervis Bay Territory and here in the ACT. It is a long-called-for step, recognising the bond between healing, dignity and the health and wellbeing of members of the stolen generations, their families and their communities, to say formally not just that we're deeply sorry for what happened but that we will take responsibility for it. Other aspects of the Commonwealth implementation plan include tangible actions that are directly linked to clear targets that we'll be held accountable for in the years ahead: measures that are new, in the priority reform areas of justice and languages, and measures that need continuing investment to deliver a longer-term impact. The Commonwealth is providing an extra $254.4 million towards infrastructure to better support Aboriginal community controlled health organisations to do their critical work. The plan also has a new focus on justice, bringing people together in a justice policy partnership to meet new targets. By 2031 we will reduce the rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults incarcerated by at least 15 per cent and the rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in detention by at least 30 per cent. To help get to this target, the government is investing $9.3 million to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services to better manage complex cases in coronial inquiries. There is also $8.2 million for family dispute resolution programs for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families. We have also set a target to see a steady increase in the number and strength of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages being spoken between now and 2031. That is why we are committing $22.8 million to support this effort. To ensure the best start in life for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, the Commonwealth is investing more than $160 million, including $122.6 million to lift participation in quality and culturally appropriate early childhood education and care. In school education, we are investing $75 million to support building on-country boarding schools, $26 million for city-country school partnerships, and $25 million to make sure primary school kids are taught using the best evidence based programs. To keep women and children safe, the plan is also investing in supporting Indigenous families with complex needs. These specific programs and payments are in addition to the many other streams of funding, programs and support—often targeted, such as school based funding—to provide real focus and assistance to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in lifting and improving outcomes. We cannot expect to see clear improvements overnight, but we believe the approach we are taking now gives us the best chance. This Commonwealth implementation plan and the proposals in it form one part of a larger whole. There are 10 implementation plans like it—one for each jurisdiction, the peaks and the Australian Local Government Association. All of them will be tracked and further shaped as we learn more about what is working and what needs to improve. The Indigenous Voice Co-Design Process final report has also been submitted, following 18 months of extensive engagement and co-design. We will further consider the details of the final report and respond in the future, following consideration by the cabinet. An Indigenous voice can add to the many other efforts being made to achieve the Closing the Gap outcomes by providing further avenues at the national, local and regional levels for Indigenous voices to be heard, including to provide feedback to government on closing the gap. Once a model for the Indigenous voice has been developed, all governments will need to explore how we can work with the voice to ensure that these views are considered. Whilst we know these outcomes won't happen overnight, we are working together, right now and continuously, with the Coalition of the Peaks, alongside the states and territories and local governments, to navigate the road ahead. We know that there are many years of hard work ahead for all of us, as we have tough years behind us. We have to learn from each other, and we will, together, do so. And, in doing so, with this new approach we should have confidence that, step by step, we can, as a country, make the differences that are necessary for all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and peoples. I thank the Senate. 09:42 Senator WONG 00AOU South Australia I begin by acknowledging that we meet on the land of the Ngunawal and Ngambri peoples, land that was never ceded. I pay my respect to their elders, past, present and emerging. I also pay tribute to Minister Wyatt, Ms Burney, Senator Dodson, Senator McCarthy, Senator Lambie and Senator Thorpe. I'm privileged to count Linda, Pat and Malarndirri as friends and to have learnt so much from them. Over the past month, our nation has celebrated the talent, hard work, integrity and achievements of Australian athletes. Few have inspired us more than Ash Barty winning Wimbledon and a bronze medal in Tokyo, and Patty Mills leading the Boomers to Australia's first-ever Olympic men's basketball medal. Their pride as representatives of Australia is as obvious as their pride in their Aboriginal heritage. There is their sporting heritage, their stated love and respect for Evonne Goolagong Cawley and Cathy Freeman, and their cultural heritage as traditional custodians of the land we now call Australia, inheritors of the oldest continuing civilisation on earth, being proud of who they are, claiming their space and not seeking to accommodate anyone's discomfort. I make these observations not to pretend sport can close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. It can't. And we need to be careful in thinking sport can overcome racism on its own, just as we need to be careful not to promote an expectation that, to be valued in our society, Indigenous Australians need to be Olympians. What then happens to the little Indigenous kid who isn't a star athlete? What happens when Indigenous athletes don't want to be boxed in and express views that some don't like? But there is something happening in sport. We see athletes the world over taking the knee together, conveying to each other and their fans that black lives matter. People who might not have come together in other circumstances are finding themselves on the same team, relying on each other, each person engaging with an act of respect and in an act of leadership. Old expectations of racial solidarity would not have brooked that. The message many are sending is: we are a team, we stand together and an attack on one of us because of race is an attack on us all, on all of our shared humanity. We see it here in Australia in the respect and affection of the Boomers for their captain and in how the AFL is seeking to improve its response to acts of racism. It is heartbreaking and unacceptable that we see overt acts of racial abuse in Australian sport, just as it is heartbreaking and unacceptable that structural racism is still so persistent. A critical part of overcoming racial abuse and structural racism is action. Just one example in my home town is that the former captain of the Adelaide Crows has been banned from playing for six games after making a racist slur against an Indigenous player from another club. This action could be taken because an Adelaide Crows official reported the comment. The chair of the Indigenous Players Alliance, Des Headland, said: Previously there's been a lot said in club rooms and change rooms that gets swept under the carpet. … … … In terms of the official, I take my hat off to them. That's leadership, that's courage. It's courageous for people to stand up and call this out. It is an individual deciding to take the risk of standing up against racial abuse and the team and the code backing that individual—something we didn't see enough of when Nicky Winmar was abused by players, media and fans and something we didn't see enough of when Adam Goodes was booed out of football. We all could have and should have done more. It took years for the AFL to reflect on how Mr Goodes was treated and to offer an apology. In a speech about Closing the Gap, why do I bring this up? It's because, at its core, Closing the Gap is about leadership, here and beyond. It's about courage. It's about each of us deciding to do what we can. It's about saying to leaders, 'We will not accept that our First Australians have dramatically fewer opportunities and consistently worse outcomes than other Australians.' It is about refusing to tolerate racial abuse or systemic racism. It is about those of us who are not First Nations people educating ourselves and not just relying on First Nations people to do the educating. It is about the leaders of our government looking within themselves and deciding they will no longer contribute to the stubborn gap, that they will actively work to overcome it. The gap between us cannot be sustained if we close the gap within us. Each of us can be leaders in our own families and communities, and we should act as though what we do makes a real difference—because it does. We should seek to find the common humanity in all of us and we should refuse to abide by any threats to that common humanity. The national government has a particular responsibility to lead, and that leadership is lacking. For eight long years this government has shunted its responsibility for progress on Closing the Gap to states and territories, future parliaments and future generations. I wish on this that Mr Morrison would do what he so rarely does and actually take responsibility. There is no leadership without responsibility. It is more than two years since the government said it would change its approach to Closing the Gap and it's now reset most of the targets, effectively shifting the goalposts on prior failures. The next Closing the Gap statement will be a critical test. For now, I offer these observations. Three targets—family violence, suicide and digital inclusion—do not have any comparison data for the non-Indigenous population. Even if the adult incarceration goal were to be met, the rate would still be more than 11 times higher than for non-Indigenous Australians. Even if the youth incarceration goal were to be met, the rate would be more than 12 times higher than for the non-Indigenous population. Only three targets out of 17 are on track: children born healthy and strong—that is, birthweight—preschool and youth detention. I will say, however, that Labor does welcome the establishment of a stolen generations compensation scheme. It was Labor that took reparations for the stolen generations to the last election, and we welcome the Morrison government coming on board with this. We will look very closely at its delivery. Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd commenced the effort to close the gap as part of his Apology to the Stolen Generations. Labor now seeks to continue and expand on that tradition. Listening to and empowering First Nations people will be at the very core of Labor's approach to closing the gap and to reconciliation: delivering treaty and truth, fulfilling the promise of Uluru. The Uluru statement called for a national process of treaty and truth-telling overseen by a makarrata commission, along with a constitutionally enshrined voice to the parliament. Our party is committed to the Uluru statement in full. We are committed to a constitutionally enshrined voice to parliament and to establishing a makarrata commission as a matter of priority, because a clear and accurate telling of Australia's story is essential to reaching our full potential as a nation. The disparity in First Nations employment outcomes is connected to other quality-of-life outcomes, such as health, education and housing. That is why we will strengthen economic and job opportunities for First Nations people and communities, including by scrapping the Community Development Program and developing a new remote jobs program in partnership with First Nations people and communities. A Labor government would get behind inclusive growth for Indigenous owned businesses, both domestically and internationally, and would reaffirm the importance of Indigenous rights and traditional knowledge in future international agreements. Our First Nations peoples were the first traders on this land, they were the first exporters and they were the first diplomats, engaging with people from other lands. Should I have the honour of serving as foreign minister in an Albanese Labor government, this will be recognised at the heart of Australian diplomacy, as a matter of Australia's historical and future engagement with other peoples. Australia's diplomacy is a projection of our identity. It is a projection of our values as much as our interests. Our identity can only be complete when Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia are reconciled. As my friend Senator Dodson says, that is the full expression of our nationhood and the Australia I want to project to the world. 09:52 Senator THORPE 280304 Victoria [by video link] I rise to speak to the Prime Minister's Closing the Gap address in the other place. Before I do that, I'd like to acknowledge that we are all on stolen land. That's right: it's stolen land. There's been no treaty; it's still stolen. There have been no agreements; it's still stolen. So I'd like to acknowledge all of those survivors, our First Peoples, right across this country, who have maintained resistance and who have survived the mass murders and complete destruction of country, who remain here today to share their country, culture, song and dance with us all. I'd like to also acknowledge the black politicians in this colonisers' place. We know how hard it is to walk inside that building as First Nations people as well as politicians. So I acknowledge you all, and I acknowledge how difficult it can be sometimes to walk in two worlds. The recently released Closing the gap report includes data on the progress made on seven of the 18 targets set out in the Closing the Gap agreement. It is hard to call it progress when three of these targets—the overimprisonment rates of our people, child removals and suicide rates—are going up. This report is telling us that the government's strategy isn't working. Our people know that. We've always known that. Mr Morrison isn't just failing in his leadership vacuum; things are getting worse. Over the last eight years of Liberal government, most key indicators have gone backwards. What's more, the target to reduce imprisonment of First Nations people by at least 15 per cent by 2031 in the Closing the Gap plan is completely inadequate. If we were to follow this trajectory, parity on imprisonment will not be achieved until 2093. We'll be dead. None of us here today will see this happen in our lifetime. The Morrison government can't even succeed in working towards this extremely inadequate target. What the Morrison government have done is put the bar on the floor, walked over it and called this progress. That's just how they operate: smoke and mirrors. The Morrison government are pushing our people backwards. Every month more and more of our people are dying in police and prison custody. Thousands of our people, our women in particular, are being warehoused in jails on remand. That's right: they haven't even been convicted of a crime but they remain in prison. My heart goes out to every black woman in prison right now. This Morrison government is taking our lives away, as our people are also at higher risk of dying in police custody. There have been almost 500 First Nations deaths in custody—two, I'm related to—since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody handed down its recommendations 30 years ago. We're not immune; no-one is immune. I want to stop and take a moment to honour their lives. Each and every one of them is loved and missed every day. So I'm going to request that the Senate please take a moment's silence for all the Aboriginal people who've died in custody. Thank you. It's devastating that our young ones don't get to live the promise of their full potential, because the suicide rates of our young mob are astronomical, and it's devastating. Under the Morrison government, more First Nations people are dying by suicide; our people are more than twice as likely to die by suicide as others. What country do we live in where so many of our people don't see a future for themselves? To all mob, particularly young mob, watching this today, know that you are strong, know that you are loved and know that you come from a very, very, very long line of warriors and country defenders. Your ancestors and the stories of your connection to country, culture, song, dance run through your veins. You are powerful and you are loved and you are needed. You are needed by your mob, by your culture and by your communities. And you are definitely needed to take up seats in this place. Look at it! Look at this place! There are the ancestors right there: they just smashed a glass behind this screen, because they are here with us too. It's shameful that the targets on life expectancy are failing and falling so short. Our people are being killed by a system that tries to choke their potential from the moment they open their eyes. I cannot tell you how many funerals I attend each year. Our community hurts and it deserves better. We are strong and capable, despite current injustices. We carry with us over 65,000 years of wisdom and leadership. Our boys, on average, have a life expectancy 8.6 years less than non-First Nations boys; our girls, 7.8 years less. Come on! Do you in there have a conscience? So many of our boys won't live to the age of 67—that's the age when plenty of you fellas in there are starting to enjoy the pleasures of your retirement. I hope you feel good about that, particularly those of you that are just there for your retirement and not there for the people anymore. We live in one of the richest countries in the world, but our boys in the Northern Territory and Western Australia have a shorter life expectancy than boys in conflict affected areas. How do you explain that to anybody? The report also showed that more First Nations babies are being stolen from their families. What you call 'out-of-home care' is too often, in fact, the forceful removal of our children. The stolen generations are not over. They continue to happen, right here, day by day. To this day, you take our children away from us to try and diminish our people and our culture. Finally, the Morrison government have announced a compensation scheme for survivors of the stolen generations. The stolen generations compensation scheme that was announced is a much welcomed and very overdue move but, in practice, it falls way short of what we need. We Greens have done our research, we have done genuine consultation—not the tick-a-box, pick-a-blackfella, pick-a-box consultation that both major parties use; genuine consultation with members of the stolen gen—on what compensation should look like. We have arrived at $200,000 per survivor, but this is a starting point, because no amount of money can compensate for the pain caused by a series of racist, harmful government actions. Does the Prime Minister really believe you can make good with a measly $75,000, after ripping a child from their mother's arms and taking them away from their family and community, from country and culture, from language, song and dance? The $75,000 offered to stolen gen members in the territories falls way short of what people need, and it comes way too late. The announcement doesn't include any provisions for the ongoing health needs of survivors. How much of the compensation money will have to be used to pay for health care and, in particular, access to mental health services? We know First Nations people who have been ripped from their families suffer from increased transgenerational trauma. Too many of our people have passed into the Dreamtime already and never saw any attempt at justice. For them, sadly, this comes too late. The solutions to all of these problems—that we did not create—have been with us all along: when our people are in the driver's seat, we all prosper. We are hurt by the Morrison government imposing top-down policies and making decisions for us, thinking that they know best. This separates us from our culture and connection to country—things that are central to our health and wellbeing—making us sicker and die younger. Our people have been managing our own affairs for thousands of years. We must be in charge of our own destiny again. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, we led the way in keeping our communities safe. But the Northern Territory government sent us body bags before they sent us PPE, assuming we would fail. When decisions are in our hands, our solutions work and we take care of our communities. First Nations culture is about caring for everyone. We modelled this in setting up First Nations legal services and community health services back in the late sixties. Imagine a better society, where Aboriginal values and leadership are at the heart of decision-making. We can only be our best and create a country where everyone can thrive when we listen and acknowledge the truth of our past and present. Together, we can work to undo the damage that still causes First Nations people harm today. There is a beautiful tomorrow where we all can thrive and where First Nations people make decisions about the future of our country. This government cannot deliver this, and this is why it must be voted out. It was legal for Rio Tinto to destroy the Juukan Gorge site. This never would have happened if blackfellas had a say on their own country. Treaties provide a way to acknowledge past injustices, resolve differences and work out how to create a shared future. As a nation, we have an opportunity to create a 21st-century treaty which we can all be a part of and celebrate together. 10:05 Senator McKENZIE 207825 Victoria As Leader of the Nationals in the Senate, I'd like to associate the Nationals with a lot of the commentary here this morning—particularly the proposal and comments of Senator Birmingham. I rise to comment briefly on the Closing the Gap Commonwealth implementation plan. That will make a genuine difference in the outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and, for the National Party, for those over half a million Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who live and work in rural, regional and remote Australia, because the facts are: despite having the will—irrespective of the colour of government—and despite having the best of intentions, no matter what level of government, the statistics don't lie and none of us have done well enough, over a long period of time, to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people can reach, as Senator Thorpe made mention of in her contribution, their potential. So it is up to us—all of us—as leaders in this place and in state and territory parliaments and local governments, and in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community more broadly, to come together in partnership to make a real, credible difference, using evidence. Yes, it has taken a little longer than people might have liked, but the implementation plan that we have before us really clearly sets out targets, goals, programs and initiatives that, in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, will make a difference and close the gap, which is what we all want to see. It is a new chapter of change, and it won't happen overnight. We won't be reporting groundbreaking changes in stats this time next year. But hopefully, over time, over years, over decades, with a shared commitment and a dedication to staying the course, we will turn that around. It's a completely different way of doing things that we've done before. We've co-designed this, in collaboration across governments and peaks and bodies, in terms of not just the economic and social data for health but the cultural determinants of health, in recognition of the importance of identity, and that is a first. We have piloted these sorts of three-levels-of-government approaches before. I was privileged to be the minister who signed off on the Barkly Regional Deal, a few years ago in 2019, which wanted to improve the productivity and livability of the Barkly through improved economic growth, social outcomes and culture and place-making. It was the first regional deal in Australia—a 10-year commitment of over $78 million—and my advice is that those 26 projects are proceeding incredibly well, which is fantastic. Last week, the Prime Minister rightfully said that closing the gap is, at its core, about children. Whether it is about child safety, better education outcomes, better health and maternal outcomes or justice targets, it is absolutely putting children at the heart and centre of what we're trying to achieve. Quality education and quality teachers have the ability to enrich a child's life and have a profound and meaningful impact on a child's sense of place in the world, and these perceptions and connections are formed very, very early. If we want to close the gap, we've got to close it at the beginning—at the very beginning, right from those early years. It doesn't stop there. We need to continue those efforts, right throughout a child's schooling, and to give them the opportunities to participate in tertiary education that they need and deserve. We know that Indigenous kids, particularly those from remote and regional areas, are more likely to start school behind, with the gap only increasing through their schooling life, and, if you start behind, it is very, very hard to catch up. It is an additional obstacle during key formative and exploratory years. We must do better for these students and we can. Last week our government announced a quarter of a million dollars to boost quality early childhood and school education for Indigenous kids. But it's not just about the amount of funding; it's about how that investment is focused. So we're targeting initiatives that improve literacy, because you can't really learn if you can't read and if you don't get those fundamental building blocks right at the start. Using evidence based approaches that we can scale up through communities, ensuring more Indigenous Australian children can participate in these programs, is at the very heart of our initiatives. We know that developing strong literacy skills from an early age supports that right throughout a student's schooling, so we've put $25 million into grants to scale up those evidence based programs. They'll be delivered in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, with a focus on maximising student engagement. We're also delivering a range of measures to support different elements of digital inclusion for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. I will be working with the Minister for Indigenous Australians to that end to make sure that connectivity is experienced right throughout rural, regional and remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Future actions will promote community led responses to build on outcomes that are designed and delivered in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and will be targeted to address any gaps in existing measures. The Indigenous Advancement Strategy will manage 245 community payphones and 301 wi-fi satellite phones in remote Indigenous communities. Indigenous media activities are also funded under the strategy, primarily through Indigenous broadcasting. Access to fixed-broadband voice services is provided to all Australians through our USG and USO arrangements, and the $380 million co-investment with states and territories on the Mobile Black Spot Program will continue to connect communities. We have been specifically funding telecommunications infrastructure across northern Australia, with $68.5 million in dedicated funding for those projects. We also have a regional telecommunications review currently under way which is engaging with rural, regional and remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities so that we can make sure our next tranche of policy initiatives meets their needs. As a former teacher, I know the impact that a quality education can have on a young person's life, and the doors that it opens are immense. We also need the basic infrastructure that underpins that, which isn't just physical but also digital. It's also about capacity, and the teachers that we'll be sending into those classrooms. I'm proud the Nationals will be championing these measures that invest in children and provide the stepping stones required for a prosperous and equitable future where they will be able to walk in two worlds. We all need to assist that outcome. We must make a difference, and we can only do that with evidence and will, which I believe we have finally got to the table in what has sometimes been a difficult national conversation. We're all in this together. It's essential that we continue to put our shoulder to the wheel to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their children have a bright, prosperous and sustainable future. 10:13 Senator HANSON BK6 Queensland [by video link] I rise to speak on the Commonwealth's Closing the Gap implementation plan. I speak on behalf of many Australians when I say, 'Well, here we go again—more targets, more priorities, more reforms, more agreements, a new approach and, of course, a lot more money.' Much treasure has already been expended, with very little to show for it. Targets have not been met, gaps have not been closed, and there has been failure on incarceration rates, life expectancy and employment. There has been failure on child mortality rates, children's literacy and numeracy, and school attendance. We can only hope the new approach in the National Agreement on Closing the Gap will work. And it might, but only because there is finally some focus on empowering Indigenous Australians to take an equal partnership in the effort to close the gaps. Finally, by sharing equal responsibility for closing the gaps perhaps we'll start chipping away at the insidious culture of victimhood which has been unjustly imposed on Indigenous Australians. I speak for many Australians when I say we look forward to a future where there are no gaps. We look forward to a future when all Australians, regardless of race, are able to avail themselves of the great opportunities that come with living, learning and working in this great nation. Many Indigenous Australians have already broken this ground and discovered how fertile it is. Many have made their marks on our country's culture, history, identity and character. As I have said before, the majority of Indigenous Australians are not victims. They are capable, resilient and valuable citizens of this great nation, and we are a better country thanks to their contributions. Dare I even say that we look forward to a future when reconciliation is completed, when we can all finally agree that we are in fact reconciled. Many Australians, Indigenous or not, would be forgiven for being sceptical about those prospects, because the gaps will not be closed and reconciliation will never be completed as long as we continue to indulge the disgusting politics of racial division. This allows the unaccountable Aboriginal industry to prey on Indigenous communities and feast on Australian taxpayers by perpetuating difference, entrenching disadvantage and fostering a culture of victimhood. For these businesses and bureaucrats it's a licence to print money. That's why they're cheering on cultural separation and division, supremely confident that this government and this parliament could always indulge it. There is nothing more racially divisive than the push to specifically recognise Indigenous people in the Australian Constitution and to legislate an Indigenous voice to parliament, with the aim to eventually put that in the Constitution, too. One Nation will take every opportunity to speak on behalf of the many Australians who will never support Indigenous exceptionalism being enshrined in the Constitution and will strongly oppose this attempt to divide us by race forever. It took 66 years for our Constitution to be finally made colourblind, removing all specific references to Indigenous people. It may take less time to reverse this important achievement by, once again, singling out Indigenous people to be treated differently from their fellow Australians. I have warned the Senate and the Australian people about the potential ramifications of recognising traditional ownership in the Constitution should we ever become a republic. Traditional ownership could effectively take the place of the Crown, and the vast majority of Australians would no longer have sovereignty over their own country or land. I have reminded the Senate that one of the essential foundations of a representative democracy is that every citizen is equal before the law and every citizen has equal political franchise—one adult, one vote. A voice to parliament would effectively give a minority of Australians more political power than the majority of Australians based, on race. In South Africa that sort of thing was called apartheid. Fortunately apartheid is something that has been banished to the past. Let's not revisit it in Australia. Recognising Indigenous people in the Constitution and creating a voice to parliament will only open new gaps while doing nothing to meet the targets of the government's new implementation plan. As I noted earlier, we hope the new approach will work and the important targets will be met as soon as possible. We have hope in particular for commitments to incentivise or expand service delivery and child and family safety and education based on evidence that they work. Too much money has been wasted on approaches that didn't work, even after it was evident. We have hope for the improved health outcomes coming from a large investment in health infrastructure and equipment in remote areas. We have hope for positive outcomes with more resources going into alcohol and drug treatments. We have hope because there are practical measures that can make a positive difference to the lives of Indigenous Australians where there is a clear need to do so. As I have said before, that's where the focus of this government and this parliament should be: on what Australians need to make a positive difference. We don't need to change the Constitution to make that positive difference. It would risk the progress which has been made towards reconciliation. It would risk the sovereignty every Australian rightfully has over this country. It would further divide the people of Australia at a time when there are already too many entrenched divisions over almost every other important issue. Let us not move backwards. Let us not revisit a racist past. Let us leave the Constitution forever blind to race and colour. Let us no longer condescend to Indigenous Australians by tolerating the culture of victimhood, which only entrenches disadvantage through generations. Let us show Indigenous Australians the respect they have earned and long deserved by treating them as equals, as individuals, and not as victims looking for a handout. Let us abandon the awful politics of racial division and work with Indigenous Australians to close the gap so that all of us can fully share in our nation's boundless opportunities and take responsibility for the course our lives will take. I'm going to take a minute or two to give my opinion on the diatribe that came out of Senator Thorpe's mouth. As an Australian, I was born here and I am indigenous to this land. I'm native to this land. I was born here, as many Australians feel. To continually have it thrown up that I don't belong here or that it's stolen land, I think, is a slap in the face. Her comments, in broad parlance, about white privileged Australians—as she said to a couple of senators, white old privileged males—are not pulling us together. This is not working together for reconciliation. She does not acknowledge the Australians that were born here. She says that there is a rate of overimprisonment. As with any Australian, if you break the law, you have to pay a penalty for it, and that means imprisonment. People must take responsibility for their own actions. When she speaks of children being ripped from the arms of parents, that is because children in these communities, at such a young age—babies and toddlers—are being raped by their family members. We don't speak up about that. Yes, they will be taken away from their families, as it is in white society. You cannot blame it on your cultural differences. These are children that need to be protected, and families are not protecting their children. As far as education is concerned, I have visited these very remote communities. People can send their children to school at the expense of the taxpayers. They are given every opportunity for an education. They are given every opportunity to have privileges paid for by the taxpayers. Other children don't have that opportunity. Billions—hundreds of billions of dollars—have been thrown at this Aboriginal industry, and yet we still talk about it today. Nothing's changed. You have representation in the parliament. People claim to have Aboriginal backgrounds—fair enough. But I am also here to represent on the floor of parliament those Indigenous Australians, as every other senator and every member of parliament is. Do not continue to divide us by throwing more money out without accountability. Do audits on the system. Ask why the land council won't hand over their land to the Aboriginal people for their independence so they can move forward with their lives. We don't do that. Why is it shut down? There have to be questions asked. Don't be afraid to ask them and speak up on behalf of those Australians. 10:23 Senator DODSON SR5 Western Australia [by video link] Firstly, I want to pay tribute to my people, the Yawuru people, and to their resilience. They are the traditional owners and native title holders on the land from where I speak to you today, my electorate office in Western Australia in the town of Broome. I also acknowledge and pay my respects to the Ngunawal and Ngambri peoples, who are the traditional owners of the lands in Canberra. I wish I could report that I was uplifted last week by hearing the Prime Minister talk about the Commonwealth's Closing the Gap Implementation Plan. Sadly, I was not so moved, and not only because the previous week the Productivity Commission had released the annual tables of data which again confirm that the lives of First Nations peoples continue to be blighted by poor health and disadvantage. No, it wasn't just the report card that depressed me. It was a telling sentence in the accompanying media release from the Prime Minister and his Minister for Indigenous Australians that cast a pall. They said their plan to close the gap was about 'real reconciliation'. That one sentence told me that the thinking of this government in relation to First Nations peoples is as stagnant as it was 25 years ago, when John Howard was Prime Minister—the prime minister who gutted the Native Title Act, the prime minister who rejected the social justice package that was meant to accompany the Native Title Act, the prime minister who refused to say sorry to the stolen generations and the prime minister who destroyed ATSIC. It was Prime Minister John Howard who used to run the line we heard again last week from Prime Minister Morrison, that service delivery will deliver real reconciliation. But before I grapple with the question of how the government's agenda to close the gap will do little to achieve real reconciliation, let me remind you just how wide the gap remains after eight years of a coalition government. The Productivity Commission's latest data are woeful. Whereas non-Indigenous females, on average, can expect to live to 83.4 years, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have a life expectancy of 75.6 years, a gap of 7.8 years. Indigenous men die younger than Indigenous women, but the gap between them and non-Indigenous men is worse, 8.6 years. The data is just as dismal in early life. The proportion of Aboriginal children assessed as developmentally on track is only 35.2 per cent, against 56 per cent of non-Indigenous kids, and the proportion of those who attain year 12 is 63.2 per cent for Indigenous youth, against 85.5 per cent for non-Indigenous youth. The figures for tertiary qualifications and employment are just as bleak, but the statistics that have always startled me have to do with incarceration and what is euphemistically called 'out-of-home care'. They show no signs of improvement. Out of every 100,000 Indigenous adults, more than 2,000 are in custody. For the rest of the population, the figure is 156. Whereas 56 out of every 1,000 Indigenous children are in out-of-home care, only five out of every 1,000 non-Indigenous kids have been removed from their families. This government is now hoping that its partnership with the states and territories, the Coalition of Peaks, and Indigenous organisations and communities will lead to better outcomes. I want to congratulate Patricia Turner, the lead convener of the Coalition of Peaks, for her sterling role in getting the government to practice its mantra of doing things with First Nations peoples and not to them. This is how a true democracy would deliver for its citizens if it truly respected and accepted them as such. So let's not be fooled by this government's other mantra, that its latest agenda to close the gap represents real reconciliation. While First Nations peoples remain unrecognised in the Constitution, the expectation that the Federation will respond positively to their citizenship needs is at odds with our past experience. For all the fanfare last week about implementation plans, governments are still to agree on new targets to do with Indigenous interests in inland waters and community infrastructure. The first target prescribes a 15 per cent increase in Aboriginal land mass subject to Indigenous rights and interests and a 15 per cent increase in their rights or interests in the sea. The second target would aim for parity in infrastructure, essential services and environmental health. The Joint Council on Closing the Gap met last Friday but couldn't reach a consensus on either target. The meeting agreed to defer further consideration until November, when I hope that goodwill will prevail. But this demonstrates the perennial challenge of negotiating at a table which rests on the unresolved legacy of terra nullius and the denied sovereignty of First Nations peoples. First Nations peoples don't want to be mere recipients of largesse from the public purse. We can all quibble about the targets and tut-tut about the perennial failure to achieve them, but sovereignty, recognition and a treaty, the real substance of reconciliation, are the bedrock on which to build a better quality of life for all in this nation. The Uluru Statement from the Heart said that the ancient sovereignty of First Nations peoples 'can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia's nationhood'. It spoke of the torment of our powerlessness. The national agreement goes some way towards acknowledging this truth. As we approach the fifth anniversary of the national constitutional convention at Uluru, the plaintive pleas of the powerful statement that emerged from there remain unanswered, as in fact and as in the spirit in which it was given. The Prime Minister's report last week said that the government had received the final report from Professor Dr Marcia Langton and Professor Tom Calma about a co-design voice. A voice to be enshrined in the Constitution was, of course, a fundamental demand of the Uluru statement. If this government wants a voice, it must release the report from the co-design process so that the public has an opportunity to view and explore the proposal and, secondly, begin the process for the referendum to embed the voice in the Constitution, but it refuses to give us a timetable on either of these matters. 'Some might want this process to be faster,' the Prime Minister told the parliament last week. Well, he might be right. The government has to come clean to the Australian public: will it or will it not support a constitutionally enshrined voice to the parliament? Stringing the parliament and the public along, as the government continues to do, is nothing short of cowardice, and it's a disgrace that it has not even embraced the other fundamental statement of the Uluru statement—the call for a makarrata commission to supervise a process of agreement making and truth-telling. On this side, the Labor Party remains unwavering in its commitment to implementing the Uluru statement in full. Let me be very clear: we support a referendum to enshrine a voice to parliament in the Constitution. Our leader has committed to this in the first term of a Labor government. We will also commit to establishing a makarrata commission to progress the other two critical elements: truth and treaty. I appeal to the government to join with Labor. Let's do something worthwhile for once on behalf of the First Nations peoples. Then we can really start closing the gap towards real reconciliation. 10:34 Senator McCARTHY 122087 Northern Territory [by video link] I'd like to acknowledge the Larrakia people on whose land I stand for this address of Closing the Gap. Baginda Yamalu Yindi, nagarna Yanyuwa li-anthawirriyara. I pay respects to elders past, present and emerging but also to all Australians who are witnessing what we are discussing in the Senate and seeing the many diverse views and thoughts in regard to how we want to improve the lives of First Nations people. The parliament hasn't got it right. Australians haven't got it right. But what's important is that we respectfully listen to the diverse views that come forward, which are really a reflection of what we see across Australia. Some of those views that have been expressed are incredibly hurtful as well and I think that it's important first off, Madam Acting Deputy President, if I can just pick up on some of the commentary by Senator Hanson. I think it's really important, Senator Hanson—and this message is directly to you—that First Nations people do not— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 140651 Senator McCarthy, I await with interest what you are about to say, but I do ask you to make your remarks to the chair. Senator McCARTHY 122087 Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy President. This is certainly in response to previous speakers, in particular Senator Hanson: the First Nations people of this country certainly do not see ourselves as victims. It's certainly not a position that we want to be in. When women are in incredible pain of domestic and family violence—and that's all women who experience it—they certainly don't want to be victims. I think we have to be really careful with the language that we use in the Senate and in the Australian parliament, in terms of trying to lift people from circumstances that, usually, are beyond their control. It's the kind of leadership that this Senate needs to portray in the language that we use, and I did want to pick you up on that, Senator Hanson, because we're certainly not victims, in terms of wanting to stay victims, but we've certainly experienced unfair and unnecessary statistics, which are what closing the gap is all about. That's why it is important that the Australian parliament addresses it and acknowledges the imperfections of our ability to get it right. The fact that we still are able to address it as a country every year on a particular day, which is now in August, says and sends a message to all Australians that it matters that we try to improve the lives and the disadvantage of First Nations people in this country. And we should never, ever be ashamed and should be unafraid to try and continue to address it, no matter how difficult and complex the circumstances. That is really a reflection of the thousands of languages that our people have across this country, and also the hundreds and hundreds of different First Nations groups across Australia. That is the most beautiful thing about speaking on Closing the Gap: I, as a Yanyuwa Garrwa woman, surrounded by my clans of the Mara and Kudanji peoples, linked closely with the Ngukurr mob, with Numbulwar mob, with Groote Eylandt mob and the songlines and the kujika that travels. That's what we can share with the rest of Australia: the stories that none of you are aware of unless you enable us to speak, to have a voice to speak to you, and not only for us to speak to you but for your hearts to be open to listen and your ears to be empty of the sand that seems to consistently block you from hearing our stories. The Prime Minister followed Labor's lead by committing to reparations for the injustices done to those removed as children from their families in Commonwealth territories, in the Northern Territory, in Jervis Bay and in the ACT. I do thank the Prime Minister for hearing the voices of those stolen generations mob. It's taken a hell of a long time, but, if you're sincere in making sure that this mob here in the Northern Territory in particular are dealt with respectfully and immediately in terms of that, then it will go a long way to bringing about a great deal of healing for those families. I acknowledge the more than 600 people who attended the Going Home Conference here in Darwin in 1994. This event brought together hundreds of First Nations people removed as children to discuss common goals of access to archives, compensation, rights to land and social justice. I acknowledge all those who told their stories in the Bringing them home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families. I acknowledge the work of people like Mrs Cubillo and Mr Gunner, who braved the complexities of our legal system to take on the Commonwealth over its historical policies of forced child removal. While their legal claim was unsuccessful—and I remember that day—the need for justice and reparations for survivors of the stolen generations was recognised by the Australian community and governments. After the legal decision was handed down in this case in 2000, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee delivered its report into the stolen generations, recommending the establishment of a reparations tribunal to address the need for effective reparation, including the provision of individual monetary compensation. Yet it wasn't until 2006 that the first stolen generations compensation scheme was set up in Tasmania, by the Stolen Generations of Aboriginal Children Act 2006. Then, in 2008, the first stolen generations compensation case was successful in the Supreme Court of South Australia. The Trevorrow judgement recognised the existence of the policy of removing Aboriginal children from their families and the detrimental long-term effects of the policy on removed children and on the wider community. We are still experiencing an even greater removal of First Nations children. These legacies and past policies have a profound impact and they do matter. Of course, in 2008, we had the national apology, and parliament was opened for the first time with an acknowledgement of country. But stolen generations survivors in the Northern Territory had still not received reparations or justice. In April this year, stolen generations survivors from the Northern Territory launched a class action against the Commonwealth. Eileen Cummings is one of the lead plaintiffs in the class action—a daughter of a Ngalakan woman and Rembarrnga man, who was born in Central Arnhem Land. Her story echoes so many. She was taken from her family at five years old and taken to Darwin and Croker Island, where she was forbidden to leave and prevented from speaking her language or to practise her culture. I don't know how you can arrive at a dollar figure on the trauma and harm caused by tearing children away from their families, not just on the children but also on the families and the wider community. But I certainly hope the redress announced last week goes some way to acknowledging the harm caused by these policies. We should also reflect on the harsh reality that First Nations people are far more likely to have their children removed from their care than non-Indigenous Australians. We still have an incredibly long way to go. It appears the Prime Minister has heard some of the voices calling for change and recognition, but this still does not acknowledge broader issues: the high incarceration rates of First Nations people, the Black Lives Matter rallies across the country and the sadness and the trauma that still exist for those who lose family members way too early. Only last week I lost a family member, someone who was a strong elder in our community, and our family is still grieving. He should never have passed away so young. He was an important elder who did so much for our people. I remember him. I remember my other noughaby, my other kuku, my grandfathers, my uncles, my grandmothers, my kurdi, who passed away in recent months, who should be here with us. Renal disease, kidney disease—just about every member of my family has some chronic disease. That is what this Closing the Gap statement is all about: trying to help and give hope to First Nations people who so desperately want to be not only seen as equals in Australia but also respected for the beautiful, diverse and strong culture that we have as First Nations people, to be respected and to take our place with dignity, to be the people that we're here to be, without racism, without being locked up and without being kept in hospital—and to play on the sporting fields like Patty Mills and Ash Barty. That's the Australia we want for First Nations people. Thank you. 10:44 Senator BRAGG 256063 New South Wales [by video link] I'd like to associate myself with almost all of the remarks that have been made this morning, and I'd also like to acknowledge the traditional owners. I want to address three things. The first is this national agreement. I also want to talk about some of the financial commitments that have been made and the way forward on the Indigenous voice to parliament. The first thing I'd say is that I think the fashioning of the National Agreement on Closing the Gap, which is being done in conjunction with the state and territory governments and the Coalition of the Peaks, is a genuine attempt to try to move from the idea of 'doing to' to 'doing with'. For people who follow these issues closely, the success the Indigenous community has had in managing COVID-19 provides a very good example of why it's important to put Indigenous people in control of their own affairs, and I think it is quite a simple concept. So much of the effort of the new national agreement and partnership is going into community capacity building and Indigenous decision-making and control. I think it is a very important and urgent reform. People are aware that priorities have been identified out of the 17 Closing the Gap targets. As I say, I think a good deal of the additional financial contributions are going into building up the capacity of Aboriginal medical services, health services, childcare services and the like. It is important that the data is clear and that we can all be held to account here. I do think that getting the Productivity Commission involved to help us track and better understand the progress that is made in these areas is critical. People who have looked at the recent report done by the Indigenous productivity commissioner, Mr Mokak, would know that the Productivity Commission's view is that this is not a question of how much money is spent in this area; it is a question of getting the investment right so that it provides the outcomes that the community is seeking. I want to turn to the billion-dollar commitment that has been made as part of the Closing the Gap agenda. I think supporting the justice targets and the language targets is very important. There is $378 million to support the stolen generations, where people had been stolen from Commonwealth territories—the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. This is an important commitment, and I know that it has bipartisan support. No-one is saying that $75,000 can replace your life, but I think it is an important gesture. There needs to be—and I think there is—additional support put around that. I urge the other states of Australia to put in place a system which is at least as good as this. I do welcome the bipartisan leadership from the Commonwealth. Indeed, the Commonwealth has led in the past. The Commonwealth was the first jurisdiction to put in place a land rights regime in the Northern Territory, which was decades ahead of some of the other Australian states. I think it's important, where there are states that have not put in place redress schemes for the stolen generations, that they do so quickly. It is only fair. In relation to language, $22 million has been allocated to supporting Indigenous languages, recognising that Indigenous languages are endangered. In fact, they are some of the most endangered languages in the world. I think supporting the idea of children's books is important. I've had my own experience with this in engaging deeply with the work of AIATSIS, which is an organisation that was set up by the Menzies government to conserve and preserve Indigenous culture and language. AIATSIS has been working with local communities to ensure that languages are preserved and then able to be used. One such concept that I'm aware of is the Dhurga dictionary, which has been published by the Yuin people of the South Coast of New South Wales. Some of the community elders have developed a dictionary which is now being used around towns like Moruya, which is incredibly transformational when you think that the kids that go to those schools will learn basic Dhurga, as well as learning English. The traditional owners were kind enough to allow me to use their language for some work I've been doing lately. The other thing that is being put on the language agenda is the dual naming of places, which I know in the past has caused some consternation. But, if people are serious about reconciliation, I think it's a very fair and very reasonable idea that you could have dual names for places. I think, in fact, that it would only enrich us all. Finally, I want to turn to the issue of the voice to parliament. Effectively, the idea of having an Indigenous voice, which was put forward formally by the Uluru Statement from the Heart and had previously been put on the agenda by the Cape York Institute, is simply that you would consult Indigenous people over laws and policies that are made about them. I think that is an entirely reasonable and quite conservative idea. I don't think it was handled well at the time, in 2017, when the Uluru statement was handed down, but I do think that there has been some important progress since then. Senator Dodson and Mr Leeser co-chaired a report which was a bit of a framework for how a voice could be developed. The government followed the progress of that report. In recent times Marcia Langton and Tom Calma have been asked to develop a report in conjunction with Indigenous communities about what, in fact, a voice would be. A voice at the local level could be about giving advice on service delivery, again working in conjunction with Indigenous communities to drive capacity building and control. The second thing it would be is a national voice which would provide advice on laws and policies. I've often thought, when I've sat in the Senate and we've dealt with things like native title amendments: 'Wouldn't it be good if we knew what the people who these laws are made for thought about these proposals?' I think we could do so much better in this space if we had a national voice to advise the parliament and the government about national Indigenous issues. I'd say to the people who are concerned about this: why on earth would we be afraid of getting more advice from citizens? I think it is such a good idea. That co-designed report is sitting with the executive government, with the minister. I think that is the meat on the bones for the voice. I hope that that report can be the basis for us putting in place a voice in conjunction with a referendum to be held in the next term after a process to consider constitutional amendments. We are getting towards the point where we need a process where Indigenous people and non-Indigenous people can put forward their views on what they think would be the most appropriate way to put the voice in the constitution. There is a range of different models that people should be able to look at and consider that take into account the concerns of constitutional conservatives and the like. My view is that you can definitely put in place an obligation on the Commonwealth to consult with Indigenous people on laws and policies that are made about them, which is effectively a voice. Then you could legislate the voice, thereby maintaining parliamentary supremacy. I know these are important issues. I agree with the Prime Minister that we shouldn't be trying to rush this reform; it's too important. It's very important that we work with the Labor Party to maintain bipartisanship. I'd like to acknowledge the Labor Party's efforts in this area. I ]think they've been very good. This is an important reform that shouldn't be rushed. I'm glad it won't be. I'd like to thank the Senate for its time this morning. 10:55 Senator SIEWERT e5z Western Australia I rise today to make a contribution to the debate on the government's Closing the Gap implementation plan. I acknowledge that we are meeting here today on stolen Ngunawal country and that sovereignty over this land was never ceded and continues to need to be addressed. The latest plan to close the gap simply can't accomplish its targets until we address issues around past injustice, colonisation of this land, sovereignty and treaty. The continued legacy of colonisation in this country, its ongoing impacts, have to be addressed if we are going to truly close the gap, because they are what has led to this huge gap developing in the first place. First Nations peoples continue to experience dispossession and oppression. Deaths in custody serve to remind us that the period of violence and injustice has in fact not yet finished. Until the first injustice, the massive injustice of the fact that we stole this land, is resolved, none of the other injustices can be properly addressed. We cannot claim that we have closed the gap and we will not close the gap. Resolving this means negotiating and enacting treaty and treaties in this land. We need to address the issue of sovereignty. We must ensure that sovereignty is recognised through a treaty- and treaties-first approach. First Nations peoples have been traumatised over generations by the actions and policies of successive governments denying them their rights. We must not forget that. Every year, when we talk about Closing the Gap, I make sure that I also raise the issue of the Close the Gap campaign's report. It used to be called the shadow report. They have again done a report. This is their 12th annual report. This year it's titled Leadership and legacy through crises: Keeping our mobsafe. This year's report was produced by the Lowitja Institute, Australia's national community controlled institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research. They make 15 recommendations, with a lot of subrecommendations. They remind us: In our annual reports we often repeat our recommendations— —that comes as no surprise, I'm afraid to say— and we remain steadfast and persistent in the expectation that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing will be respected and understood. The time for governments to deliver has long passed. They also say: Self-determination is critical and to ensure that change occurs, our voices must be heard by governments at every level of society. We perpetually recommend the same approach: to involve us, to listen, to reform and invest. Be it in systemic reform, policy design, service delivery, evaluation or agreeing upon funding, "nothing about us, without us" will be the only successful approach. That remains true in this report as well, because we are still not delivering on some of the key areas that need to be addressed. There are countless examples of government policies that continue to deny First Nations peoples their rights and undermine Closing the Gap. Across the federal government and the state and territory governments, governments continue to turn away from raising the age of criminal responsibility. I'm absolutely ashamed and embarrassed by the fact that they are still dragging their feet. The new Closing the Gap plan includes targets to reduce the number of First Nations people in prisons by at least 15 per cent. It is just unconscionable that you could limit yourselves to this. How are we still locking up children? How can we meaningfully achieve any targets for getting children out of prisons, even when the government has this measly target, while we are locking up children of 10 years of age? It is unconscionable, and I totally support the comments and acknowledge the massive contribution Senator Thorpe made in this chamber this morning where she clearly highlighted this issue. Incarcerating children doesn't help them; it brutalises them. Children do not belong in jail. We need more investment in prevention through justice and social reinvestment. We also need ongoing secure funding for Aboriginal legal organisations. It is shameful that the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments have shown disregard for the Royal Commission into the Detention and Protection of Children in the Northern Territory and that most of its recommendations in fact remain unimplemented. It is no surprise that the Don Dale royal commission recommendations have been so thoroughly ignored, unfortunately. It's 30 years since the deaths in custody royal commission, and more First Nations peoples are dying in custody than when the commission was called. The language used in the new Closing the Gap plan is clear: this is a plan that was developed by ministers, departments and governments with First Nations peoples; it wasn't developed by First Nations peoples. First Nations peoples need to be in the driving seat. We cannot close the gap until First Nations peoples have control over policies and genuine community-led decision-making. I do congratulate the people and the organisations that have been driving this agenda and have been taking it up to government continually to address this issue of closing the gap. My comments are not meant to cast a slight on them at all. They have been driving this agenda and, if it weren't for their commitment, we wouldn't be where we are now. But we still have a long way to go. The government say they are listening to First Nations peoples, but when it comes to social policy that impacts on First Nations peoples what they're actually doing is listening to the billionaires. The cashless debit card dreamed up by a millionaire harks back to the old ration days. There is no consent to this card in First Nations communities. It is making peoples' lives harder. Their fundamental right to choice and control and to make their own decisions has been taken away from them. What did I just comment on earlier? We need to ensure that First Nations peoples are supported and ensure that they are the ones making the decisions. The government knows that the cashless debit card doesn't work, because evaluation after evaluation has shown that, but it continues to pour millions into it. How about putting the millions into addressing treaty, addressing injustices and addressing the criminal justice system to make sure that it's not locking up 10-year-olds? First Nations women are also disproportionately impacted by punitive programs, such as the punitive ParentsNext program. ParentsNext is not culturally safe for First Nations parents and results in a disproportionate number of First Nations parents losing their payments. Programs like these directly contradict the Closing the Gap objectives. We need supportive approaches that are led and delivered by First Nations peoples. The cashless debit card and the ParentsNext program entrench and exacerbate poverty in First Nations communities. It is plain hypocrisy to claim that the government are committed to closing the gap, to make promises about community decision-making and to make promises about working with First Nations peoples when they are not listening to First Nations peoples when they say that these programs are punitive and that they don't work. The evidence shows that they don't work, but this government continues to pursue these programs. So, on the one hand, they are here with their implementation plan, saying they're committed to closing the gap, while, on the other hand, their very programs and actions undermine those commitments. It's so clearly contrary to what First Nations peoples are saying to them. At the same time they claim they are listening to First Nations peoples, they are delivering programs that undermine the very implementation plan that we are talking about today. There needs to be significant change in this country. We need to start it by acknowledging that we stole this land, that sovereignty was never ceded and that we need to have treaty and treaties in this country. Then we need to make sure, as part of that process, that the truth is told. Then we need to make sure that we have policies and programs in place that are led and delivered by First Nations peoples if we are going to close the gap. 11:05 Senator LINES 112096 Western Australia I acknowledge that we are meeting on the land of the Ngunawal and Ngambri peoples, and I pay my respects to their elders past and present and to their emerging leaders. I acknowledge that this always was and always will be Aboriginal land and that sovereignty has never been ceded. I want to also associate myself with the statements made by Senators Wong, McCarthy and Dodson, and I also want to say to Senator Siewert: your advocacy on behalf of First Nations peoples will be missed in this chamber when you leave. I want to start by really challenging the government's response to Closing the Gap, because, as I think both Senator Dodson and McCarthy have outlined, it's built on a failed system. That system has failed, and so we're not really going back to the fundamentals to look at how we need to change things. Despite the Prime Minister saying that we want to do things with Aboriginal people, when you continue to build on a system which has failed, you will never be working hand in hand with First Nations people. In order for us to re-establish the system, we have to come to grips with the truth. We do need truth-telling. That is the fundamental start: to acknowledge the past wrongs that white people colonisers did to our First Nations people. That's the starting point, and we've never acknowledged that. We've said sorry to the stolen generations, but even that, as proud as I was to be in this parliament and to hear that address, is not enough. We've got to go right back to truth-telling, from the day we as non-First Nations peoples set foot into this country, and move on from there, because that's where true partnerships will emerge from. That is the starting point. When I look at Western Australia and I see all of the massacre sites which really only a handful of people know about, it's disgraceful. They are part of our history, and they're not that old in Western Australia, sadly. Those generations involved in the massacres and the people who perpetrated those massacres are only a few generations away. It's still living memory. One of the other issues I want to challenge is the notion that I heard from the Prime Minister last year and this year—it really got up my nose and, sadly, it was repeated by Senator Birmingham in this place—that the government wants First Nations children to be proud. Well, they are proud. It really bugs me to hear that. My granddaughter—a Gija person from Warmun, from stolen generations—is a proud young Aboriginal woman. How dare the Prime Minister of this country somehow think he needs to fix her belief in herself? She's got a strong belief in herself. I'm incredibly proud of her. A couple of months ago, along with Senator McAllister and Senator Siewert, I had the absolute privilege of being invited to a meeting in Broome held by Kimberley women. It was on June Oscar's report, which the government has made no comment on—a landmark report, based on research and interviews that haven't been done in 30 or 40 years. June Oscar, in her role as commissioner, went across the country, listening to what young Aboriginal girls and women were telling her, and she produced this report, which is from their voices across this country. The Morrison government doesn't have the respect to even respond to that report, but the Kimberley women did. We had about 100 women in the room from all over the Kimberley, and they were so powerful. They took June Oscar's report and they looked at how it might work across the Kimberley. Everyone participated: young women, older women, women from all over the Kimberley. On day 3, they invited the state minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Stephen Dawson, to come, and they told him very clearly they didn't want a seat at his table. They weren't interested in that. They wanted him to come to their table. That's what true listening is about. It's about acknowledging First Nations people, where they are and how they want that partnership to develop. They were very powerful and they told the state in no uncertain terms what the expectation was. The pride and the respect in that room for each other was palpable. You could feel it in the air. I think some women had come from Senator McCarthy's country. They brought an amazing dance and spirit with them and it lifted the room. It was very, very powerful. It's appalling that the Morrison government completely misses that complexity and the respect that's there. We've just had two Aboriginal women elected to the state parliament in WA, both from the Kimberley. The respect, love, support and pride for those women to be successful was huge. So, Mr Morrison, don't speak to First Nations people about respect and about who they should be, because they already are. We're just not watching, we're not listening and we're not working in the right ways. As long as we have punitive measures that harm Aboriginal people, such as the cashless debit card, the CDP, and ParentsNext, we are not in a partnership. Those measures are not about partnership; they are punitive measures. I've attended most of the Senate inquiries we've had on the cashless debit card. When we were in Kalgoorlie, who did we hear from? The local councils. Since when do local councils in Western Australia deliver social services? They don't, but it didn't stop them from having an opinion. What I heard in those cashless debit card hearings was all about the deficit agenda. Sadly, that's what I heard from the Prime Minister in his Closing the Gap address, and it was repeated here by Senator Birmingham—the deficit model—instead of stepping back and saying: 'We have responsibility here. We have created some of this harm. We have created these appalling statistics.' In WA, it is shameful that we are still locking up children as young as 10 who actually don't commit crimes that get them a custodial sentence, but, because we don't have a good bail system, they end up in custody for stealing a piece of fruit or stealing a couple of chocolate bars in a shop. I can say right here and now that, as a young white kid, I stole chocolate bars from shops. Did I end up in juvenile detention? No, I didn't, because the colour of my skin is white. Yet today, right across Australia—it's only the ACT so far that has moved on this—we are still locking up 10-year-olds. If that doesn't do harm, I don't know what does. They're babies; they've barely got their permanent teeth. They're just kids, beautiful kids, and we are locking them up. So I don't quite know how we've met the youth detention statistic in Closing the Gap. I bet it's because we are only looking at children who receive a custodial sentence, not all the ones that we've held in custody awaiting their opportunity to go before a magistrate at the Children's Court. There's the CDP. We have seen some insulting programs across this country. We've seen people breached. All that those measures are doing is casting First Nations people further into poverty, because they all involve the withholding of money. That is not about working in partnership. That's not about respecting the place that First Nations people are in. That is not about creating partnerships for the future. That's about continuing to be the colonising government that does punitive harm to First Nations people. When you grow out of that system and survive, it shows what an amazing person you are. 11:15 Senator FARUQI 250362 New South Wales [by video link] I speak to the Prime Minister's Closing the Gap address and associate myself with the heartfelt comments made by my colleagues Senator Thorpe and Senator Siewert. I acknowledge the traditional owners of the many lands that we are here from today and pay my respects to elders past and present. I'm on the land of the Gadigal of the Eora nation, but no matter where we are in this country we are on stolen land. I do this acknowledgement in full recognition of the fact that we are still so far away from justice for First Nations people. As we strive for justice and equality, First Nations people and their voices must be front and centre of the struggle, because there can be no social or environmental justice without racial justice and there can be no racial justice without First Nations justice. Australia has a colonial past and a bloody history that is tainted with dispossession and violence. This violence against First Nations people has never ceased. It continues to this day in the settler colonial systems and structures of this country. The depth and breadth of prejudice against First Nations people is still rooted in law enforcement and societal attitudes and institutional systems. It is also, sadly, rooted in this parliament and this chamber. Listening to this morning's debate, I hear a lot of sadness and reflection but I also hear some ignorance and malice. There are still members of this place who refuse to acknowledge the systemic racism, who refuse to acknowledge the suffering and our collective need to address it. The 2021 Closing the Gap report shows that almost all key indicators have gone backwards since the Liberals came into power. Rates of suicide have worsened, and thee are rising numbers of First Nations children being removed from their families and of young people and adults in prison. It breaks my heart as a mother and as a human being that almost 19,000 First Nations children are currently removed from their families, 11 times the rate for non-Indigenous children. The violence that I speak of is inherent in our systems that are still taking babies away from their families, the systemic failure that ensures that ever more First Nations people are being imprisoned and the structural inequalities that push people to the brink. From 2016 to 2019, almost a quarter of deaths of young First Nations people were by suicide. First Nations young people and children are constantly told to be resilient. It's actually not anyone's job to tell First Nations people to be resilient. They know what resilience in the face of colonial oppression looks like. But, Mr Morrison, it is your job to upend the systems that continue to perpetuate injustices against First Nations people. You've only come to the table on reparations to stolen generations after hundreds of survivors said that they would sue the federal government for compensation. It's still too little and too late. The racist harm and violence caused to people through stolen generations cannot even begin to be addressed by the insufficient reparations that have been announced by this government. First Nations' disadvantage results in their shorter life expectancy and poorer health. They're disproportionately over-represented in prisons. It's been 30 years since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, yet we are still in a horrific place where ever more First Nations people are dying in police custody. Almost 500 First Nations people have died in custody since the royal commission. If this isn't a call to change the system, then I don't know what is. In his address, Mr Morrison never once mentioned climate justice. We know that remote communities and people connected to the land are most affected by the climate emergency we're in. Two centuries of colonisation have wrecked the millennia of care of country by First Nations people. There can be no environmental justice without First Nations justice. The target set for reducing imprisonment of First Nations people is also so utterly inadequate, and there is no immediate new funding to support the government. This needs to be addressed. This government and their predecessors have tinkered around the edges but have never committed to what grassroots First Nations people have been demanding for years—for decades. Put First Nations communities at the grassroots level, in the driving seat, and fully fund their work. Commit to and start a process for treaties. That will be a start towards the healing and justice that is so needed in this country. 11:20 Senator RICE 155410 Victoria [by video link] I'm very pleased to be able to speak on this Closing the Gap statement today, because closing the gap with our First Nations peoples is such a fundamental thing that we need to address in Australian society. I want to acknowledge that I am speaking today from the lands of the Wurundjeri people of the Kulin nation from my office in Brunswick. I want to acknowledge their elders, past and present, and I want to acknowledge all First Nations people, all around the country. I want to acknowledge that the land that we're all on is sovereign Aboriginal land. It always was and always will be Aboriginal land. I also want to acknowledge the First Nations people whom I am very proud to be able to share the Senate with: my colleagues Senator Lidia Thorpe, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, Senator Pat Dodson and Senator Jacqui Lambie. I'm very aware that I am speaking today as a person with immense privilege. I have the privilege of having always had a roof over my head, good health, good education, and being very confident of my own abilities. As a white person I've never experienced racism. I haven't experienced intergenerational trauma. I can only imagine and empathise with people who haven't had the same privilege and commit to using my privilege to working alongside First Nations peoples for justice. I am a product of the settler colonialist project that is Australia. I live on stolen land. I work on stolen land. Australia was violently wrested from First Nations peoples who had lived here for 60,000 years or more. People were massacred. They were poisoned. Food systems, life support systems, culture and families were ripped apart, destroyed. The very existence of our First Nations peoples was denied through the concept of terra nullius. When I was growing up, my understanding of the First Peoples of this land and the First Nations of this country was extraordinarily limited. The culture I grew up in, which still pervades mainstream Australian culture today, was that First Nations peoples were basically peripheral to mainstream Australia, that they were primitive peoples living in the outback or fringe dwellers on the edge of towns, and there was a process of assimilation going on, that we whites were superior and that eventually they, the blacks, would assimilate with us and become like us. I now know just how wrong, how damaging and how destructive these mainstream cultural attitudes were—and still are—to our First Nations peoples. I find it extraordinary to think that it's only in my lifetime that the First Peoples of this country were finally recognised as citizens of Australia. At the time I was born, First Nations babies were being taken from their parents. They were being taken—stolen—from their community, their culture and their language. And they were being fostered with nice white families like mine, or corralled into children's homes that did their best to destructively hammer their blackness out of them. This is Australia's violent history of dispossession, and it's ongoing: the number of First Nations people in custody, the suicide rates, the early deaths, the child removals and the massive numbers of First Nations people, including children, who are brutally imprisoned. The deaths in custody show that this history of dispossession is an ongoing present reality. The huge gaps between First Nations peoples and the rest of us show that this is the case: we are still a colonial country and our First Nations peoples are still treated as second-class citizens by most people in this country. There is still racism against our First Nations peoples. It is still rife in our community, as Senator Hanson's contribution this morning made clear. We are never going to close the gap unless we acknowledge that this is our reality, unless we acknowledge our history and unless we acknowledge the ongoing injustices in Australian society. We will never close the gap until we can tell the truth and then move on together. We cannot undo the past. The past has occurred. We are now a multicultural community of over 25 million people here in Australia. But what we need to do is acknowledge the truth, acknowledge the dispossession and the trauma and then commit ourselves to making amends. While we are still celebrating Australia Day, instead of acknowledging it as Invasion Day or Survival Day, while mainstream Australian culture doesn't acknowledge this truth, doesn't acknowledge that we are living on stolen land, doesn't commit to a process of decolonisation and doesn't acknowledge the underlying racism that pervades our country, we are not going to close the gap. We are never going to close the gap until we have leadership that commits to decolonising, commits to truth-telling, commits to treaties and commits to genuine self-determination by First Nations peoples, rather than ongoing neo-colonial control. We need leadership that acknowledges the racism that is still rife in our communities, and we need leadership that then says we need powerful, antiracism strategies to address it. We need leadership that commits to protecting country and to genuinely consulting with, listening to and not overriding the wishes of First Nations peoples—leadership that is actually First Nations peoples alongside other peoples. We need to be managing country hand in hand with our First Nations peoples and, for example, not proceeding with fracking vast tracks of unceded land in the Northern Territory without consent. We need to be protecting our precious forests and their wildlife, rather than destroying them without consent. We need to be taking urgent serious action to slash our carbon pollution to zero so that we can have climate justice, and it can be racial justice as well. We need to be protecting country, protecting our future, making sure that we have a safe climate for all of us to be living in. We need to be protecting the web of life, to be respecting and nurturing the entanglement of relationships between every living creature and every part of the world that we are a part of. We have to do this for all of our sakes, for Australia's sake. We can never be at peace with ourselves as a country until we do. All of us have so much to gain by truly acknowledging and valuing our First Nations peoples as First Peoples who are the traditional owners and custodians of all of this land and who maintain that ownership and custodianship of the land. We can learn, we can listen and we can embrace wisdom and knowledge and commit to protecting country. We can celebrate culture and then work powerfully and creatively together in our evolving shared culture, proudly rather than hypocritically. It's only by doing that that reconciliation with our First Nations peoples can become a reality and we will truly be on the journey to closing the gaps that are currently impacting so harmfully on all of us. 11:29 Senator PRATT I0T Western Australia This morning, at the outset of this speech, I want to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land our parliament meets on today, the Ngunnawal people, and the traditional owners of Perth, where I hail from, and the Whadjuk people within the Noongar nation as well as all of the wonderful First Nations communities of Western Australia. It is a great honour to be a representative in this place, working alongside the likes of Senator Pat Dodson, for those people and communities. As we all know, we have a long road to closing the gap in life experiences, life expectancy, social health and economic outcomes for First Nations people here in Australia. Today, I want to talk about a different gap. It's a gap that, when addressed, makes such a critical difference to closing the gaps that have been outlined in the Closing the Gap statement on all those health and social outcomes. It also closes a gap for all of us as Australians. That is the importance of our nation celebrating, learning about, resourcing and respecting First Nations culture and people, and how much we still have to learn. We've come some way, and a long way, but not nearly far enough. It's evident in our cultural institutions, our schools and our communities. I want to lay on the record that we're all the poorer as a country for not having done enough of that. I include in that the importance of the implementation of the Uluru Statement from the Heart. As I reflect on my own life as an Australian, I remember, in 1979, the 150th anniversary of the centenary of the so-called foundation of Western Australia by British colonists. I remember the celebrations at school and the re-enactments. I recall them very vividly. They were done with blindness, as far as I could see from a child's eyes, to the many First Nations people of Western Australia and to the frontier wars and massacres that took place across the state. I would spend my childhood holidays at Rottnest Island, ignorant at the time to the fact that it was a place of misery, slavery and incarceration, a place of chains and death for many hundreds of First Nations men from around the state. I recall the common parlance of appalling racist language across the community and in the playground. As a background to my childhood and growing up, I finally learned of the ongoing structural marginalisation of First Nations people in my home state, in a real sense, when I went to university at UWA. I knew of this in my heart, but I'd never really had a chance to learn about it. I spent some time studying African history at about the same time as the end of apartheid. This was in the 1990s. I learned about the restriction of South African people's movement, their removal from homelands, the law acquiring them to have papers to go anywhere, the stealing of wages, the stealing of children and so on. I also learned that the many laws of South Africa that were still evident at the time of apartheid, the laws that I had studied, had been copied from my own home state of Western Australia. With my eyes peeled back anew, I could see the many layers of this legacy etched into the daily life of First Nations people in my home state and, indeed, for all of its citizens, whether in the remote communities of the Kimberley or the strong First Nations communities in the Wheatbelt, where they've nevertheless been dispossessed from country in the process of clearing and agriculture. With my eyes opened anew, I have had the chance to reflect now on how far we've come in the last 30 years and what we have learned from First Nations communities, and it is with the deepest, most heartfelt sense that I say today how much richer my own life as an Australian is for the opportunity to share in First Nations culture and in the many diverse local cultures from my own home state of WA. I believe fervently in what First Nations people have achieved in coming together with the Uluru Statement from the Heart. I have no fear of its implementation and I really do not understand why this government has sought to block its aspirations. Its implementation can only do great good for our nation. As that statement said: With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia's nationhood. I believe very much that all Australians have a great deal to gain from the expression of that constitutional change and structural reform, including in the way that we debate issues and listen in this place. I don't see constitutional recognition, or indeed a voice to parliament, as a controversial or difficult thing. After all, it is the job of this place, through our Senate committees, to listen to the voices of all Australians. It should appear simple enough, in the same way we are able to have a parliamentary joint committee for corporations, a redress committee or an economics committee, to have an approach and a committee that listens to First Nations people on their terms and utilises their cultural paradigms as it does that. It's done in plenty of other parliaments around the world. I have to say, in touching on the Uluru statement, that in Western Australia we have almost as many First Nations people in our prisons as Victoria does, which is pretty astounding when you consider the difference in our population size. So I very much want to endorse the principle of makarrata, so that we as a nation can come to terms with our future and reflect on our colonial history and the frontier wars and First Nations peoples' struggles in that regard. In that context, I want to commend the production of York that I recently saw in Perth at the Heath Ledger Theatre. As I reflect on what the Greens were just saying in this debate, I want to say that we can't hector the rest of the country into this but we can embrace the notion that we all have so much to gain in the full expression of ourselves as a nation. I see this in my six-year-old son's pride, curiosity and joy in learning about First Nations culture at his own school and reading their stories. It is a far cry from my own childhood and a real reflection of the future I hope we can all achieve as a nation. 11:39 Senator MARIELLE SMITH 281603 South Australia [by video link] As I give this contribution remotely, I begin by acknowledging that I do so from the lands of the Kaurna people, and I pay my respects to their elders past, present and emerging. As a South Australian senator, I also acknowledge the 39 Aboriginal language groups that make up the state I represent, as a senator. I pay tribute to Senator Dodson, Senator McCarthy, Senator Lambie and Senator Thorpe, as well as Minister Wyatt and shadow minister Burney in the other place, and I reaffirm my commitment to voice, treaty and truth. On the whole, this year's Closing the Gap data makes for difficult reading. Of the set targets aimed at addressing Indigenous disadvantage, only three are on track—children born healthy and strong, preschool and our youth detention. Closing the Gap is an area of public policy where a spirit of bipartisan commitment is crucial, and I acknowledge all senators in this chamber who share that commitment genuinely. But taking a bipartisan approach doesn't mean avoiding appropriate scrutiny. Indeed, it is only continuous scrutiny and accountability that will pave the path to change that we so desperately need to see. Two years ago the government said they would change the approach to closing the gap, in partnership with peak First Nations organisations. As Anthony Albanese has done, I acknowledge the role played by Pat Turner and the Coalition of Peaks in this work. But we still don't have data or a measurement of progress on the four priority reforms. Some of the targets lack serious ambition. We should not and cannot settle simply for improving the lives of our First Nations people while maintaining stark inequalities between First Nations and non-Indigenous Australians. Of the Closing the Gap targets that we don't have data to measure progress for, this is deeply concerning. Every one of the Closing the Gap targets is important, from ensuring that families and households are safe and youth are engaged in employment and education to making sure First Nations Australians are empowered to maintain their distinctive cultural, spiritual, physical and economic relationship with country. All deserve our full support and determination, and we must recommit to removing racial discrimination and disadvantage across all areas of our society. There is a glimmer of hope in some of this year's data, because one target which the data shows we are on track to reach is an absolutely crucial one for all of our futures—to ensure that children are engaged in high-quality and culturally appropriate early childhood education in their early years. This target is for the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children enrolled in early childhood education in the year before full-time schooling to reach 95 per cent by 2025. Data from the Productivity Commission estimates that, based on 93.1 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the age cohort being enrolled in a preschool program, that target will be met by 2025. Our long-term efforts towards closing the gap require getting early childhood education right. We know that it is in the first thousand days of a child's life where critical brain connections are formed and that, during these first thousand days, children need the opportunity to develop well to access the all-important fundamentals of play based learning, nutrition and nurture. Early education can play a role in ensuring that these fundamentals are met for all Australian children, and, for children experiencing disadvantage, it is especially important that we get this right. Of course, this must be done in support of families and in support of the irreplaceable and essential relationship between children and their families. Let us never forget the disastrous policy failures that have come out of this place to achieve the very opposite. Let us never forget that it was only 13 years ago that we gathered here in this place to finally say sorry to the stolen generations. While there is better news in this year's Closing the gap report about early childhood education enrolment rates, there of course remains so much work to do. It is of some comfort that the outcome area of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children being born healthy and strong, which aims to increase the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander babies with a healthy birth weight to 91 per cent by 2031, is also on track, subject to caveats. But, if we are to truly give all Australian children the best possible start in life, we have to make much more progress on issues such as the devastating overrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the child protection system. This year's figures show us we are a long, long way from any meaningful progress on this issue. In fact, the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the system increased from 2019 to 2020. In my state of South Australia, rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander kids in the system are almost 12 times that of non-Indigenous kids. Just think about what that statistic means, because, whatever the individual circumstances that underpin that statistic, it should move all of us to tackle the disadvantage and discrimination faced by First Nations people in every aspect of life. When it comes to levels of social and emotional wellbeing, we are not on track to meet the target of a significant and sustained reduction in suicide for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. That represents far too many unbearable losses for far too many families, and, tragically, we were reminded, earlier this year, on the 30th anniversary of the handing down of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody in April, that more than 470 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have died in custody since 1991. There is so much work to do, and, although these words can feel hollow, having been uttered so many times in this place, the time for announcements and for promises is long past. Labor is committed to closing the gap; we are determined to see it through, and I am proud to be from a party that shares that genuine commitment. Labor believes every Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child must grow up with the same opportunities as those of non-Indigenous children. That's a right of all Australian children. Labor has a plan to turn the tide on incarceration and deaths in custody by building on the previous success of justice reinvestment programs which address the root causes of crime, including rehabilitation services, family and domestic violence support, homelessness support and school retention initiatives. Labor will provide specific standalone funding for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services, to ensure that First Nations people can access culturally sensitive supports when they need them. We also know that, as crucial as the tangible measures that underpin Closing the gap are to improving the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, we also have a duty—an enormous duty and responsibility—to fully embrace the Uluru Statement from the Heart, 'Voice. Treaty. Truth.' Labor's commitment to Uluru is solid. Our commitment is to the establishment of a First Nations voice enshrined in the Constitution, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians to take a rightful place in their own country, as it was put, and a voice must be coupled with a makarrata commission with responsibility for truth-telling and for treaty. We must fully reckon with our past so we can walk together towards a more equal future. In closing, I want to acknowledge and associate myself with the earlier contributions of Senators McCarthy and Dodson and to dissociate myself, in the strongest terms, from the contribution of Senator Hanson, which was offensive, hurtful and divisive. There is no place for it here or indeed anywhere in Australia. I am, as a senator and as a human being, committed to listening more to and learning more from our First Nations Australians, striving to do better by them and by our history, and striving to be part of a better future, and I would urge all senators to do the same. 11:48 Senator ROBERTS 266524 Queensland As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I acknowledge all people of our nation. Earlier this month, I returned from more than two weeks listening to the people on the ground in all communities across Cape York—communities like Coen, Laura, Lockhart River, Port Stewart, Bamaga, Seisia, Umagico, Injinoo, New Mapoon, Thursday Island, Saibai Island, Badu Island, Weipa, Mapoon, Napranum, Aurukun, Pormpuraaw and Kowanyama. That followed previous visits to cape communities, to Northern Territory Aboriginal communities and to Aboriginal community gatherings in southern Queensland. I now turn my comments to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. I acknowledge people like Warren Mundine and Jacinta Price, and Jacintha Priscilla Rose Geia, who has taken responsibility for her life and recently graduated from university after battling with domestic violence. I acknowledge Bruce Gibson, Hope Vale business owner and a leader on the cape. I acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the NRL and the AFL, whose participation at elite levels of their sports exceeds their proportion in the general population of all Australians. Aboriginals and Islanders are excelling in this country at times—just like other members of the community. And I acknowledge and wholeheartedly endorse Senator Pauline Hanson's speech and comments earlier this morning. Now, I'm no expert on Aboriginal and Islander matters, yet I am a human and I know what I see in any community, regardless of race, colour or religion. Let me share some insights. What is happening on the ground in Cape York are some exciting new improvements, yet there is a perpetuation of the misery and squalor that for too long has characterised some Aboriginal communities. The first topic is native title. Recognition of previous occupancy is needed. White and black people on the cape speak with a common voice, saying that native title has added another layer to negotiations for development and people largely accept that. What is not accepted is the inability of Aboriginal people to have rights to use their land due to the Native Title Act. I quote from a member of my staff, who visited with me on the cape: 'An unusual feature found in the preamble to the Native Title Act is a significant overemphasis on the influence of United Nations principles, which do nothing to tangibly benefit Australia's Indigenous people.' The Native Title Act, as told to me by Indigenous leaders and community members, is recognition but otherwise offers little more than window-dressing. It is hindering Indigenous people from advancing their interests in our society. Aboriginals are not able to achieve ownership of their own homes if the area falls under native title. It's hurting the very people it was meant to serve. Maybe the meaning is beyond the Aboriginals and the whites in this country and has everything to do with the United Nations. It's locking up land. The Aboriginal leaders and members of communities say, 'What is the point of having native title when Aboriginals lack the right to use the land and cannot use it as collateral for starting a business?' The next one is closing the gap. In my experience, we tend to achieve that on which we focus. Instead of focusing on a gap, which will perpetuate the gap, we need to focus on standards applicable and expected in every community and measure progress towards that. A prominent islander who earned my respect through our hours of discussion—and he's involved in government—expressed it well when he said bluntly that focusing on the gap perpetuates the gap because there is a whole industry that exists only while the gap exists. Those people—consultants, agencies, lawyers, politicians and ministers—exist only because of the gap. They have an interest in perpetuating the gap, and they do perpetuate the gap. The money, authority and power needs to be taken out of the hands of the Aboriginal industry and given to the Aboriginals and islanders in the communities. This Aboriginal industry—by the way, Aboriginals use those exact words for the people holding them back—makes money from people's misery and perpetuates the misery. The next point is on data and facts. Some in the Aboriginal industry exist because of poor data and the lack of consulting people on the ground in communities. Some exist because they misrepresent the data. Misrepresenting the data, altering the facts, hides the problem, and that prevents a suitable, robust solution. When data is accurate, we need to use it in context and convey it accurately. Above all, we need to dig down to the core problem. That's where the opportunities for advancement lie. Those who misrepresent data in the belief that they need to exaggerate the misery to get something done about it, in fact, derail efforts and perpetuate the misery because they cause further new miseries. For example, deaths in custody tell a story about our whole nation and need to be dug into properly, not taken out of context. The core issue on the cape is shoddy governance and a confusing mismatch and alphabet soup of federal, state and local government programs that are riddled with waste, duplication and, from what we're told—and it seems entirely plausible—corruption. As a result, taxpayer money is wasted. Taxpayers are funding billions of dollars each year for Aboriginal programs, yet only a fraction reaches the Aboriginals and islanders on the ground in communities. Much is lost in waste. Much apparently is stolen or selfishly redirected, as is power, as are resources and as is control, for personal benefit. We need to improve governance to ensure everyday Aboriginals receive and efficiently use the money and ensure that taxpayers get value for their money. Those funds will be more effective when granted with sound intent, instead of patronising paternalism. We need to give more autonomy to those communities to take responsibility. These people in the communities are crying out for authority over their own lives and communities. I remind the Senate of something I've said many times. Maria Montessori said, 'Whenever one sees a lack of responsibility, there is a lack of freedom.' Across the cape, to varying degrees depending on the community, people are crying out for self-determination. People and communities need self-determination. Australia needs these communities to have self-determination. Aboriginals in many communities are ready for freedom because that brings accountability. One further issue needs to be mentioned—past injustice. The murdering of Aboriginals and islanders, the capricious, heartbreaking stealing of land and destruction of houses, and the fracturing, relocating and deaths of families in large numbers, as recently as the 1960s: this is a blight on our history. Yet that is what it is—history. It is to be remembered but not used politically nor to foment guilt today. Guilt is a negative energy and, when used to drive, it ultimately drives negative consequences. In some of the communities, and with some individuals and groups, we could feel and I acknowledged the deep sorrow, continuing sadness and ongoing grief amongst Aboriginals and islanders. While past injustices to Aboriginals still weigh heavily, the current generation of Australians are not responsible for this. We are, though, responsible for the poor state and federal governance. That is our responsibility as voters. I turn to Indigenous voice. Only one community said that it was adequately consulted on the Indigenous voice to parliament. Others had not even heard of it. Those who had heard of it reported to us that either the consultation was shallow and brief or the proposal will divide communities. Councillors said, for example, 'That voice will be for Aboriginals and not for islanders.' That spurred the thought in them that if Aboriginals have a voice then islanders need a voice. They could see what was happening. At its heart, a special voice for a specific group only separates and alienates that group. I want to talk about culture. The first step in assisting Aboriginals to lift communities is to understand the Aboriginal culture. I do not understand many aspects of Aboriginal and islander culture, yet I can see and know that I do not know and that I do not understand the culture. I can see that cultural aspects are crucial for lasting solutions and progress. This is fundamental. It is the arrogance and ignorance in this building that proclaims solutions without understanding culture. After listening closely to the people across the cape recently I was shocked by the patronising paternalism heard in the other chamber last week. Instead of politics denigrating other parties, or exaggerating and sometimes falsely representing an initiative of the speaker's party, we need to focus on the data, core issues and solid plans, with unity between state and federal governments that puts people's lives and livelihoods ahead of the party politics that is again infecting some of today's speeches. We need a focus on Aboriginal and islander issues with the intent of freeing these people to be accountable and proud. That starts with real listening, real understanding and real involvement with authority. (Time expired) 11:58 Senator GREEN 259819 Queensland [by video link] I begin by acknowledging that we meet on the land of Ngunawal and Ngambri people, the traditional owners of the lands which parliament meets on today. I'm also calling in from Cairns, the land of the Gimuy Walubara Yidinj people in Far North Queensland. I pay my respects to their elders past, present and emerging. I also pay my respects to the elders past, present and emerging of the lands of Cape York, Mornington Island and the Torres Strait islands. I am so lucky to live in this region and to learn from their stories and their spirit. For eight long years this government has kicked the can down the road on responsibility for and progress on closing the gap. It has been more than two years since this government said it would change its approach to closing the gap. I fear that this change is in approach only. It isn't a change to make change; it's a change for change's sake, to shift responsibility and accountability so that this government can say that it has done something, when nothing has been achieved. There has been no measurable progress on the bar this government has set itself on the priority reforms of shared decision-making, building the community controlled sector, transforming government organisations and shared access to regional data. These are meant to be the backbone of working with First Nations organisations and underpin the path to self-determination, but this hasn't moved beyond rhetoric. The new targets in Closing the Gap include the social and cultural factors that determine overall health, and this is important: things like housing, access to services, child protection, family violence, culture and language, and land and water rights. As Anthony Albanese said in his speech in the other place earlier this week: There is no pathway to ensuring First Nations Australians live as long and as healthy lives as non-Indigenous Australians without steadily addressing each of these interconnected targets. More than half a year after the new Closing the Gap agreement was signed, First Nations people are still far more likely to be jailed, die by suicide and have their children removed than non-Indigenous Australians. Only three of the 17 targets that have been set are on track. Today I'd like to focus on one of those targets—housing. Target 9 of the Closing the Gap agreement is: By 2031, increase the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing to 88 per cent. Indigenous Australians make up three per cent of the Australian population but accounted for 20 per cent of all persons who were homeless during the last census. Labor has consistently called on the Morrison government to outline a plan to address the severe overcrowding in First Nations communities across Australia. Nationally, in 2016, 78.9 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were living in inappropriately sized housing. This is just what we know through census data, but you don't need data to tell you that this is an important issue. You can see it with your own eyes. The shocking thing is that we know that many ministers of this government and many MPs and senators who are members of this government have visited remote and regional communities and have seen overcrowding firsthand. The Morrison government knows how important this is, yet the Prime Minister takes no responsibility for this target. I was disappointed but not surprised to discover last week, after the Closing the Gap speech was delivered, that there is not a single cent of new funding for housing in remote Indigenous communities in this country. There is no new funding for the Northern Territory, Western Australia or Far North Queensland—the cape and the Torres Strait. There are no details about how this Morrison government will achieve this target. The COVID pandemic has shown us that housing is crucial to health and wellbeing. You can't isolate from the coronavirus if you don't have adequate housing and you cannot live a healthy and meaningful life unless you have the housing you need. It is a crucial first step to supporting the health and economic outcomes of First Nations communities. What good are this government's empty promises for a better future for First Nations people when there literally aren't enough houses to go around? In 2018 the coalition government walked away from the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing. This was a 10-year agreement that saw the Commonwealth government, under Prime Minister Rudd, commit $5.5 billion over 10 years to address the shocking levels of overcrowding and poor housing conditions in remote communities. Prime Minister Turnbull and then Treasurer Scott Morrison walked away from this agreement. Mr Morrison refused to recommit to the partnership when he became Prime Minister. Instead, in the lead-up to the last election the Morrison government did what they have always done—made an announcement. They announced a one-off payment of $105 million—such a drop in the ocean compared to the 10-year funding agreement. This funding is for communities in Cape York and the Torres Strait, but when you break it down it equates to only four or five houses for each community. This announcement was made by Warren Entsch and Nigel Scullion, the former Indigenous affairs minister. It led to a lot of people believing that this was a short-term solution and there would be an announcement from this government in future budgets. Well, there hasn't been a further announcement. There is no funding, and the $105 million? Not a single house has been built with that funding. We know that overcrowding is getting worse while this government sits on its hands, but, instead of doing anything about this, the local member for Leichhardt, Warren Entsch, told the ABC that he doesn't hold a building licence. That was his excuse for not getting these houses built or delivering any future funding for this basic right of our Indigenous communities. The government should be investing in social housing and in Indigenous housing. It would be a win-win for our country and for the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Australians, and it would also create jobs to make sure that we've got training and apprenticeship opportunities for young people in communities. That's exactly what a Labor government will do, if elected. Anthony Albanese has already announced a $10 billion social housing fund to build 30,000 affordable houses, and $200 million of that fund will go to repair and maintain housing in remote Indigenous communities. I was so proud when that announcement was made. Yet, during the Prime Minister's Closing the Gap speech last week and at his press conference, where he appeared to shout and rant at journalists about this process, we heard nothing about remote and Indigenous housing. We know that there is a need to deliver the Uluru statement, and it comes back to truth-telling and treaty-making. But we need to tell the truth about what's happening right now. In communities in regional and remote Queensland, we have babies living in houses with 20 other people. There cannot be a situation where Australians think it is acceptable for a minister in this government to visit a community like that and leave not wanting to fix it. We do need to fix this. We need to fix it straightaway. It is not something that can wait for an election announcement or for the Prime Minister to need something to announce to help himself in the polls. This is something that should be done because it's the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do to fix overcrowding in our communities. It is a target in Closing the Gap, but there's no funding from this government. Every time the government get up in this chamber and they speak about closing the gap and all of the things that they are doing and the way that they're working with First Nations communities, I can't help but think that none of these achievements will actually have any impact unless we fix housing first. Housing is a basic human right, and our First Nations communities deserve the dignity of a good home, a house to live in, somewhere to raise their family, a place to come back to at the end of the day. They deserve to have these homes on their country where their cultural ancestors started their lives and where their lives will end one day. 12:08 Senator POLLEY e5x Tasmania [by video link] I begin by acknowledging the Palawa people, the traditional custodians of the land from which I am streaming today. I pay respects to their elders past, present and emerging. For eight long years the government has shifted its responsibility in progressing closing the gap, deflecting it to the states and territories and leaving it up to future cohorts. It has been more than a year since the new Closing the Gap agreement was signed, yet First Nations people still have significantly higher incarceration rates, are more likely to die by suicide and are more likely to have their children removed than non-Indigenous Australians. These are statistics that we should not be comfortable with. Disappointingly, only three out of the 17 targets are on track to being achieved. There's also no measurement on the progress of the four priority reforms which aim to change the way governments work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and are designed to strengthen their culture. These include: sharing decision-making, building the community controlled sector, transforming government organisations and sharing access to regional data. These reforms are meant to be the pillars for working with First Nation organisations to support the path to self-determination. I'm concerned that these have not moved beyond discussion. These are real commitments, and with political will we will improve all 17 targets and bring Australia into line with Closing the Gap. We need sustainable leadership and meaningful reform. We do welcome the additional funding announced by the Prime Minister last week, but he has also clearly walked away from implementing a voice to the parliament. This is despite the fact that, at the beginning of his term, it was allegedly high on his agenda. Now there is no hope that the Liberals will get a legislative voice to the parliament before the next election. As always, Mr Morrison promises a lot but fails to deliver. They're clearly against the enshrined voice that is being called for by the Uluru statement. The Prime Minister also promised a new approach, and we welcome that, but previous history causes us to question this: is this new money he has announced or is this another rehashed announcement that is full of spin? This is a government that never follows through, and this is something that is too important to miss the mark on. As we stand, Australians have done a great job of protecting Indigenous communities from the spread of COVID-19. However, there is currently limited data available on vaccination rates in Indigenous communities. It's important to ensure that comprehensive data is collected so that vulnerable communities do not fall through the gap. Despite Indigenous people aged 55 and over being classified as a 1b priority group since late March this year and Indigenous people aged 16 and over since June, vaccination rates are very low. According to data obtained by the Guardian from the Department of Health, approximately 24 per cent of the eligible population of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have been vaccinated and just over 10 per cent of the eligible population has been fully vaccinated. This compares with 41.4 per cent of the general population aged 16 and over who have received at least one dose and 19.7 per cent of the general population who are fully vaccinated. The fourth priority reform under the National Agreement on Closing the Gap is shared access to data and information at a regional level. If we are to implement this reform and improve the health outcomes of Indigenous Australians, we need a higher level of detail in the data on vaccination rates. These priority reforms need to move from rhetoric to action—to ensure that, in the short term, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are safe from the threat of COVID-19 and to improve longer-term health outcomes so that they live as long and as healthy lives as non-Indigenous Australians. The targets set out by the national agreement must be addressed holistically, as all of the targets are interconnected. The Morrison government must ensure that they lift their game so that more than three indicators are on track. Labor's plan to close the gap will take action to address inequality through policies that strengthen First Nations' economic and job opportunities. The First Nations population is young and rapidly growing, and there will be a surge in the number who will be joining the working-age population in the coming years. Having a job bolsters our economic independence and is crucial to determining our wellbeing. All Australians should have the opportunity to share in Australia's good fortune. However, currently, First Nations Australians have significantly lower rates of employment and workforce participation, and higher rates of unemployment. To improve the economic and job opportunities of First Nations people, Labor will double the number of rangers by the end of the decade to 3,800 to help protect and restore both our biodiversity and our cultural values. The Indigenous rangers program will provide valuable employment for Indigenous people in regional and rural communities. The program maintains connection to country, grows local economies and protects and restores the environment. As part of this program, funding for Indigenous protected areas will also receive a boost of an additional $10 million each year to improve biosecurity, biodiversity and management of cultural sites, and Labor will deliver the $40 million of cultural water promised in 2018 but not yet delivered by the Morrison government. To improve employment opportunities on another front, Labor will also set a target to increase First Nations employment in the Australian Public Service to five per cent by 2030. In the private sector, Labor will support the continuing work of some of Australia's largest employers in increasing the rate of First Nations employment, to prevent the ripping off of the First Nations arts and crafts which robs Indigenous artists of their income— Debate interrupted. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT 10000 Thank you, Senator Polley. You will now be in continuation. I shall now proceed to senators' statements. STATEMENTS BY SENATORS 24 STATEMENTS BY SENATORS COVID-19: Vaccination 24 12:15 Senator VAN 283601 Victoria I rise today to speak on a matter that is critical to the security of our nation and the welfare of our population. The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us many valuable lessons. Many of these have been tough lessons to learn, but as a government we have shown that we are capable of learning as new data and more dangerous variants have emerged. One of the lessons that this pandemic has taught us is that, at times of international crisis, when fear is gripping the world, access to essential goods is critical to the security of our nation. The closure of borders, limited supply chains and the hoarding of supplies are all examples of how we have seen other nations react in response to this crisis. Not all of these reactions have been in Australia's national interest. It is therefore critical that we have sovereign capability to manufacture and provide essential goods, whether they be PPE, vaccines or other items essential in our supply chains. The lessons we learn from this pandemic will be vital to how we respond to other crises, not just other pandemics. CSL's ability to produce the AstraZeneca vaccine domestically has shown us the benefits of having this type of industry in Australia. I would encourage those opposite to stop fearmongering, stop promoting vaccine hesitancy and get behind this amazing vaccine. I have. It is protecting me. While we have been blessed to be able to produce the AstraZeneca vaccine in Australia, which has been integral to our vaccine rollout and to saving countless lives around the world, we have seen a number of examples of other nations withholding vaccine supplies at the expense of nations such as ours, but more importantly at the expense of poor countries with no sovereign capability. The EU can never again lecture other countries on the basis of morals. This highlights the value of having domestic capability to research and manufacture medical technology locally. We must be prepared for the next pandemic and we must be prepared to stand on our own two feet. As we have seen from around the world, vaccinations have been key to living with COVID-19. If we are to ensure the health and security of our nation, we must be able to produce our own vaccines and produce the latest and most effective medical technologies. We've seen throughout this pandemic that our economic security and national security are inextricably linked to our health security. We cannot have one without the other. While the Morrison government has handled this pandemic and we have managed to have fewer deaths, more people in jobs and an economy that is performing better than it was pre-pandemic, we might not be so lucky next time. The Australian government has made substantial investments to support access to safe and effective vaccines for all Australians. Just this week, as you would have noted, the Therapeutic Goods Administration provisionally approved the Moderna vaccine, which is another example of an mRNA technology vaccine like the Pfizer vaccine. Going beyond the current pandemic, mRNA has the capability to be translated into broad therapeutics and vaccines for diseases like cancer, HIV, the flu and cardiovascular disease. To ensure that Australians have access to the most advanced medical technology, we must develop a sovereign capability to research and manufacture mRNA technology in Australia. This must be done not just in response to the current crisis but also because of the capability it will provide us to protect and treat Australians from future health threats, as well as current difficult-to-treat diseases. Work is currently underway to create mRNA technology around the world to address illnesses such as cancer, HIV, Zika virus, Epstein-Barr virus and autoimmune disorders, as well as cellular engineering and protein replacement therapies. Not only that; the development of a sovereign capability to create mRNA technology will create the potential for thousands of associated jobs and for great benefits to our economy. However, constructing this sovereign capability is no easy task. Such a vital and critical undertaking is a complex task, and where Australia decides to place and operate an mRNA facility is a critical decision for the future of the nation. An mRNA manufacturing complex requires the best medical research ecosystem and support. It needs to be located somewhere which has a proven pharmaceutical research capability, and it requires a workforce with skills in complex precision pharmaceutical manufacturing. There is only one state in Australia which ticks all these boxes, and it is Victoria, my home state. If we are to be successful in this undertaking, we must first place this facility where we have the strongest capability. The state that I represent, Victoria, is the home of Australia's biotech and medical research community. No other state in Australia can match the depth of research, therapeutic, clinical and manufacturing experience that Victoria has to offer. An opposition senator interjecting— Senator VAN 283601 I will take that interjection and I will debate you on that any time you like. If you give me another 10 minutes, I'll run through every point of why Victoria could beat South Australia hands down. We are already home to 70 per cent of the global and domestic pharma industry, with companies such as CSL, GSK and Pfizer. This is combined with world-leading research institutes, such as Burnet, Doherty, Walter and Eliza Hall, Florey, and Peter Mac, and two global-top-20 universities, including my alma mater, the University of Melbourne, and the university at which I am currently studying, Monash University. This makes the state well poised to begin this endeavour. In Victoria we have the nation's largest talent pool of researchers and the largest pharmaceutical manufacturing workforce. Specifically, the state already has the greatest concentration of RNA researchers in Australia, working on mRNA vaccines, samRNA and other RNA therapeutics. With such a strong RNA ecosystem and capacity in research, translation and manufacturing of pharmaceutical goods, Victoria is ideally placed to develop the sophisticated supply chain that is required to establish onshore mRNA manufacturing. Due to the fact that we already have this native capacity in Victoria, it simply would not make sense to locate this type of facility anywhere else. Currently, the wheels are already moving in Victoria for this to happen. Universities, research institutes and industry are already working to accelerate onshore mRNA clinical development and manufacturing. What is truly exciting is that we have a local COVID vaccine candidate that has been developed in Victoria. This candidate, developed by Professor Pouton, will soon undertake phase 1 clinical trials for Australia's first locally developed mRNA COVID vaccine. This candidate has already received $3 million from the Australian government, through the Medical Research Future Fund, to cover the cost of phase 1 trials. However, as I said, a sovereign mRNA capability can't just be about COVID-19, even though that will be its most urgent use. We need this capability to put Australia in the lead in developing other mRNA vaccines and therapeutics. Think of it as building capability in new technologies such as the internet and silicon chips, and look at the industries that they lead to. MRNA is an enabler platform, not just a standalone technology product in itself. I don't often praise the Victorian government, and for good reason, but I do give credit where credit is due. Five million dollars has recently been given to the Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences from the Victorian government's $50 million fund to develop mRNA manufacturing capability in Victoria, and the Victorian government has recently established an agency, mRNA Victoria, with the aim of developing Australia's mRNA capability. While this is a good start, I would encourage the Victorian government to invest further in this endeavour and its associated universities and research institutes and to work with the federal government to establish this capability. Such a project will require deep cooperation of both levels of government and significant government funding. For such a critical pursuit, we must all be willing to work together for the security of our nation. Tay-Sachs Disease 26 12:24 Senator MARIELLE SMITH 281603 South Australia [by video link] Today I want to draw the Senate's attention to one of South Australia's most remarkable residents, Ms Anna Pak Poy, and the work of the foundation started by her and her husband, Marc, the Rare Find Foundation. Anna and Marc have experienced a trauma that would test any human to their absolute breaking point. Their beloved son, Sebby, was diagnosed with a disease called Tay-Sachs when he was just seven months old. Tay-Sachs disease is a rare genetic disorder which Anna and her husband, Marc, had no idea they could be carriers of. It is an inherited neurodegenerative condition of which roughly one in 300 people is a recessive carrier. The carrier rate is higher in certain communities. While it is a rare condition, it is also a devastating condition. Infantile Tay-Sachs first presents symptoms at about six months of age. Signs can range from minor indications of muscle weakness or movement problems to the loss of motor skills and seizures. When parents have no idea they are carriers, the symptoms are unexpected, perplexing and devastating. It has no cure. Life expectancy is less than four years. In March 2019, Anna and Marc lost their beautiful, cherished son, Sebby, at just 22 months old. They were robbed of a future with their little boy. Not only that; from the first point of diagnosis they encountered roadblocks and bureaucratic red tape within our health system and within the supports that are meant to help families like theirs experiencing such trauma. The uncertainty places parents on an island; the diagnosis leaves them stranded there. Specialists have not previously encountered the disease, there are no other parents to talk to who are in the same boat, and there is no clear path to follow. Whether it is Tay-Sachs or Sandhoff disease, while the parents are trying to support their child, the disease is taking hold in the brain of their child. Both diseases affect infants in a similar way. A genetic mutation disrupts the activity of an enzyme key to the body's capacity to break down lipids. These are most commonly understood as fats, though that is not the only form of lipid. The point is that these are common chemicals and the inability of the body to process these adequately is a huge problem. Tay-Sachs and Sandhoff each have different genetics and a different molecular pathway, but they both result in the build-up of lipids, specifically called gangliosides, in the nervous tissue of the brain. In normal infants, gangliosides are made and biodegraded rapidly in early life as the brain develops. The inability of the body to remove these chemicals leads to the slow deterioration not only of brain tissue but also of muscles and nerves. For infants, ultimately, it is fatal. For Anna and Marc, the impact of the shock and pain of Sebby's diagnosis was compounded by the limited support available to their family to guide them and the limited support available to those medical professionals who treated their son. Thankfully, they received some support from a family overseas that made them feel just a little bit less alone, but there could have been more. There should have been more. Australia has some of the best healthcare professionals and facilities in the world, but they are not invincible. They are not always prepared or equipped for rare diagnosis, and that is what needs to change. I must be completely honest: I'm not sure I have the strength or resilience within me that Anna and Marc have shown. I am in complete awe of them. While they have lost their beloved son, they have never lost their determination to fight for him or indeed for the other little boys and girls in Australia diagnosed with rare diseases. In August 2019, Anna and Marc together established the Rare Find Foundation to provide care and support for families throughout the diagnosis of Tay-Sachs and Sandhoff diseases. The foundation seeks to raise awareness of the rare diseases and promote carrier screening, early diagnosis and further research. The work of increasing screening is essential because rare diseases in too many children in Australia are going unnoticed for far too long. Until now, very little attention has been brought to Tay-Sachs and Sandhoff diseases and, when a diagnosis of a rare disease is made, there has been far too little support available to families to help them through such a difficult time. One thing which can help is connecting families who receive one of these diagnoses with another family who has been through the same, and that is core to the foundation's work. Another is to raise awareness in the community about what these diseases are and how we can better support those families and children who are affected. We know that awareness plays a critical role in prevention, research and enabling systemic change. It can also bridge the isolation that affects so many families. To this end, the foundation has launched diagnosis support and disease information guides. These play a central role in raising awareness of these conditions, acting as an educational tool for families who have received a diagnosis and further educating the wider community. I want to acknowledge the Hospital Research Foundation, whose generous support has made this work possible. But, of course, there is more work ahead, not least of which is tackling the deficiencies within the NDIS that are continuing to cause families and children with these diseases an unbearable degree of distress that must not be allowed to continue. In this work, I'm proud to stand by their side as both a supporter and as patron of the foundation. I know the Rare Find Foundation will make a difference, because I know that Anna will never stop fighting for children like her son Sebby and she will never ever stop fighting for the families that love them. Domestic and Family Violence 27 12:31 Senator WATERS 192970 Queensland For almost three years now I've moved motions each sitting acknowledging the number of women killed by violence since the previous Senate sitting—a small gesture to keep this issue in the minds of senators and in the minds of the public and to recognise violence against women for the national crisis that it is. I can't move those motions anymore, since motions have been axed by the big parties because they don't like voting on issues they'd rather avoid. But I will keep talking about the epidemic of violence against women. The national government doesn't even keep real-time figures, but, according to Counting Dead Women, a volunteer project of Destroy the Joint, 25 women have been killed by violence so far in 2021. Women are three times more likely than men to experience intimate partner violence and 2½ times more likely to be hospitalised from domestic violence. Intimate partner violence causes more illness, disability and deaths than any other risk factor for women between the ages of 24 and 44—and all of those statistics are much worse for First Nations women, for women with disabilities and for young women. We've all heard the figure of 'one woman a week killed by a current or former partner'. We've all heard that figure but still the violence persists. Those figures don't take account of the children killed in those acts of violence and they don't take account of the long-term trauma of coercive control. They don't take account of the reports made to police and ignored. They don't take account of the women who haven't been believed. And they don't take account of women who don't report because they fear they won't be believed. This is a national security crisis. The experts have told us time and time again that it is gender inequality that is driving domestic violence. The massive response to Chanel Contos's call earlier this year for young women's stories demonstrates the need for structural change to address rigid gender norms that stifle men and devalue women. They devalue their time, their points of views, their unique contribution to the world, their reproductive autonomy and their care work. They create a rape culture in which victims are blamed for what they wear, for where they were, for what time they were there and for how much they drank and where harassment and assault are excused as 'boys will be boys'. It's no coincidence that the highest rates of sexual violence in Australia are perpetrated by men aged 15 to 19. We desperately need expert led, age appropriate holistic education programs, from early childhood education onwards, that dismantle gender inequality, that teach kids about respectful relationships and consent and that eliminate the sexism and misogyny that lead to and excuse gendered violence. What we got was the milkshake video. Chanel Contos and the thousands and thousands of students calling for decent consent education deserved so much better. The program for the upcoming National Summit on Women's Safety 2021 has no specific mention of education and only briefly references primary prevention. Our Watch's expert-based and well-regarded online resource, called The Line, has been waiting for many months for approval from the minister to get it back online. To live up to their campaign slogan 'Stop it at the start', the government must get The Line back online. We also need an urgent rollout of Our Watch's effective whole-of-school respectful relationships education in primary and secondary schools. The Australian Human Rights Commission's comprehensive review of workplace sexual harassment, Respect@Work, shone a light on how prolific gendered harassment and violence remain across Australian workplaces. The Respect@Work report set out a clear road map for action to eliminate harassment in workplaces, including, unsurprisingly, calling for greater investment in respectful relationships education. The 55 recommendations in that report laid down a comprehensive plan. But the government are not acting on all of those recommendations, despite initially implying that they would. The government's so-called Roadmap for Respect—which was finally released more than a year after the commission's report was handed down—has cherrypicked recommendations: it has deferred some and has noted some others for later consideration. The bill that was meant to be before us in this place today to implement the report, but has been pulled from the program, only does half of the job, and it ignores the strongest recommendation, which is to introduce a positive duty on employers to create a safe workplace and to create a culture in which harassment doesn't thrive, is never ignored and will always have consequences, and where employees feel secure knowing that their jobs are not on the line if they dare to challenge a colleague who has harassed or demeaned them. Report after report, inquiry after inquiry, evidence from sector experts, academics, practitioners, health professionals, teachers, social workers, counsellors, lawyers and survivors—over and over, they all say the same thing about how to end gendered violence and harassment. We know what we need to do: first and foremost, fund frontline services. The demand for crisis services, helplines, support services and legal services far exceeds their current capacity to help everyone that seeks their help. Women's legal services in many states have reported having to turn away nearly half the calls that are made to them, particularly during COVID. We need specialist services that deal with the intersectional issues faced by young women, First Nations women, women with disability and women from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. The government's funding under the national plan falls well short of the $1 billion per year that the sector says is needed to ensure that no-one is turned away when they reach out for help. This year's budget doubled the funding for domestic and family violence services, but it's still only one-quarter of what the sector says is needed to meet existing demand, let alone the likely increase in demand as this pandemic continues. We need a major investment to keep women safe. The next thing we need to do is invest in prevention and education, including behaviour change programs. We also need to invest in affordable housing—that is, crisis housing, transitional housing and long-term housing, the full spectrum—so that women fleeing abusive relationships have got somewhere to go. Older women are the fastest-growing cohort of people facing housing insecurity and homelessness in Australia. Rapid investment to increase housing stocks is essential to guard against women staying in abusive relationships because they have got nowhere else to go. We also need to give workers paid domestic and family violence leave so that their job is not at risk as they deal with the trauma of an abusive relationship. We also need to improve women's economic security, first of all by addressing the gender pay gap. Companies are currently required to report on their gender pay gap, but they suffer no penalties if they do nothing to fix that gender pay gap. The review of the Workplace Gender Equality Act this year provides an opportunity to strengthen reporting and compliance and to take action against companies that do nothing to close the rampant gender pay gap in their workplaces. We also need to improve women's economic security by making the superannuation system fairer so that women are not retiring into poverty, after a lifetime of unpaid care work and taking career breaks to look after children. We also need to improve women's economic security by making child care free and requiring employers to provide flexible working arrangements to give families more choices and to allow women to re-enter the workforce. We need to make workplaces safe. We need all 55 recommendations of the Respect@Work report to be implemented in full. We in this place need to lead by example. Thanks to the courage of women like Brittany Higgins, Rachelle Miller, Dhanya Mani and Chelsey Potter, Australia knows how toxic parliamentary workplaces can be. Things need to change. While the Senate has finally reached gender parity, as a whole, parliament, across both politicians and senior advisers in particular, remains male dominated. We've seen sexual harassment and bullying dismissed, belittled and ignored. We've seen a senior minister not only not subjected to an independent inquiry over serious allegations but elevated to Acting Leader of the House. The Jenkins review must be a turning point in the cultural change needed to make parliament a place that women are not only safe to work in but proud to work in. In March, tens of thousands of women marched across Australia, demanding better. This government needs to start listening. The Greens want action that rewrites the rules for gender equality and improves women's economic security, safety and wellbeing. We want an Australia where women are safe, respected, valued and treated as equals in public and private life. Gendered violence and harassment is a national crisis, and it's high time that this parliament and this government treated it as such. Agriculture Industry 29 12:41 Senator BROCKMAN 30484 Western Australia Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, agricultural producers have been hit with a range of disruptions that have threatened operations. The Morrison government sought to listen to industry and proactively address the challenges faced by agricultural producers. An example of this is the International Freight Assistance Mechanism, which is supporting agricultural exporters shipping perishable products as they adjust to changing supply chains and transport arrangements. There's also been the $72.7 million Agri-Business Expansion Initiative, which helps agribusiness expand export markets. As many in this place would know, we are also developing a dedicated agricultural worker visa, making it easier for producers in industries such as grains, dairy, meat, wool and fisheries to access the labour they need in very challenging times. As I've said in this place before, skills shortages and access to suitably qualified labour is probably the principal challenge facing agricultural producers right across Australia, including in my home state of Western Australia. The closures of international borders, while essential and very sensible as a response to the coronavirus, have disrupted the operations of, in particular, our seasonal producers, who have had to supplement their labour force for many years during the busy periods. The closure of the international borders have, of course, been exacerbated by problems caused by the closures of interstate borders on an intermittent basis throughout the COVID-19 period. To highlight just how essential this issue is, a recent survey by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry WA showed that 88 per cent of agricultural businesses identified skills shortages as the principal barrier to growth. We should always be concerned when we see statistics like that affecting such a broad range of businesses across the agricultural sector, which of course encompasses so many different varieties of products and so many different aspects of the supply chain, from transport to production, to logistics and, obviously, to the marketing side of agricultural products. As I said, the federal government stands ready to assist. Unfortunately, we have an issue with the Labor government in Western Australia, which seems to want to do some blame shifting in this area, rather than getting the work done to solve the problem. The WA agriculture minister, Alannah MacTiernan, is telling farmers that the federal government has ignored a request to make Commonwealth quarantine facilities available for seasonal workers. This is a gross distortion of the facts. The reality is that the WA government has not submitted any formal proposal to allow this to take place. In fact, the request appears as a single line in a letter referencing Commonwealth facilities, such as Christmas Island. There has been no further suggestions, no detail, nothing about health protocols, the numbers required or the costs that the WA government would bear to get this done. They simply haven't done their homework. They haven't done the work required, the work that the industry requires that they do, to get the job done. There are several options available if the Western Australian government is genuinely concerned about dealing with this problem. For a start, they could submit a proper proposal requesting the use of, or help with, a facility, a Commonwealth facility, with the relevant details, perhaps signed by the Premier even and backed by Western Australian health authorities. The Morrison government is prepared to consider and work with the states and territories regarding proposals such as this to assist the agricultural sector to get the workers they need. I would also urge the Western Australian government to consider signing on to the Agriculture Workers' Code. New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and the Northern Territory have all signed on to the code, whose aim is to provide a nationally consistent approach to the movement of workers across domestic borders in critical agricultural industries. Signing up would better facilitate the movement of labour available in the eastern states to assist with, for example, our upcoming grain harvest. It would also provide the industry with greater certainty in the long term. Unfortunately, I hate to say that the state Labor government in Western Australia has some form when it comes to dealing with the bush and with regional Western Australia in particular. Nobody in my home state would be unaware of the fiasco surrounding Moora college, the attempted closure of the school of the air; the closure then reinstatement of the Community Resource Centres, which affected dozens of small towns across Western Australia; and, of course, declaring Perth non-regional, then realising how that affected the movement of labour and re-declaring it as a regional centre. I really do urge the state Labor government to get on board in addressing this issue. The Western Australian food and agricultural sector is something that all Western Australians can be proud of. We are a world-class producer of high-quality products. We are the nation's largest export grain producing region. We are one of the most pest and disease free agricultural regions in the world. The Morrison government will continue to listen to our regional and rural communities and will continue to back our farmers and primary industries. In that light, I would like to acknowledge my colleagues in the other place who do such a power of work in that regard, in particular my good friend Rick Wilson from the electorate of O'Connor, which forms the southern half of the wheat belt, stretching out to Kalgoorlie and down to Esperance and Albany; Melissa Price, the member for Durack, who covers the northern part of the wheat belt and right up to the tip of Western Australia, including our wonderful mining sector; and, of course, Nola Marino down in the south-west corner in the region surrounding the city of Bunbury. We have an amazing agricultural sector in Western Australia, one that we as Australians can all be very proud of, but, as a Western Australian and someone from the regions I am particularly very proud of. Our agricultural sector has done a power of work through this coronavirus period. Through the lockdowns they have performed exceptionally well in terms of getting food to people, not just in Australia but right round the world. We must always remember when we're dealing with agricultural issues in this place that we produce around three times the food we need in Australia so we need to export our high-quality agricultural products to the world and the world both wants them and needs them. Our export markets rely on the presence of our protein, and our grain in particular, to satisfy their consumer demand to put bread and meat on their tables. We must always remember our very important role in those international supply chains, in getting that high-quality food and fibre to the rest of the world and in being a good international citizen in that regard. Workplace Relations 30 12:49 Senator SHELDON 168275 New South Wales [by video link] The High Court's recent decision in the landmark WorkPac v Rossato case was a huge victory for multinational, multibillion-dollar labour hire firms. It was also a huge victory for the Morrison government, which spent $300,000 of public money—taxpayers' money—supporting WorkPac's case. But it was a sickening blow to mine workers who have seen their jobs outsourced to labour hire firms and have been forced onto permanent casual contracts on less pay with no paid leave. Degradation of pay and conditions in the mining sector is emblematic of what is happening across every sector of the economy, where middle-class jobs are being stripped of middle-class pay and conditions. A lot of members of the government claim to speak for miners and their families. Then they come to Canberra and fight tooth and nail to strip away their rights at work. They do the site visit, put on the hi-vis vests, smear a bit of coal dust on their faces and tell people in Central Queensland or the Hunter that they are on their side, and then they pay $300,000 of taxpayers' money to support a labour hire company in a court case against a casual mine worker. In recent weeks, the Senate Select Committee on Job Security has heard directly from mine workers, from unions, from local communities in Queensland and Western Australia, from mining companies and from labour hire companies. They had a lot of things to say about labour hire. Frankly, the mine workers and the local communities had nothing good to say. We heard that the big mining companies, some of the richest and most profitable companies in Australia, are shifting their workforce over to labour hire companies so they can cut their pay and stop mine workers from speaking out about their conditions or safety issues and so that workers are easier and cheaper to dispose of. Some companies, like BHP, have even learned from one of the most antiworker companies in Australia, Qantas. BHP have set up their own internal labour hire company so that BHP can undercut itself on pay and conditions—the Alan Joyce effect, I call it. Rob Foot, a retired mine worker and AMWU member from Central Queensland, said: I was working for United Group Resources … for 14 years, and one day the mines came along and said every contractor onsite had to work for WorkPac. These people wanted to reduce my wages by half, and on a casual basis … … … … … I went from $150,000 to $70,000 and had to pay for my transport … accommodation on site … inductions … medical … training … He said: … whereas in the past that was all supplied by the employer. That is the same company the Morrison government just spent $300,000 of public money to support in the High Court. The Minerals Council, a lobby group for mining companies, admitted that casuals on labour hire actually get paid 24 per cent less on average, doing exactly the same roster and exactly the same job, than permanent mine workers operating at the mines. This is obviously a rort. It's plain and simple. Wayne Goulevitch, another mine worker from Central Queensland and a member of the miners union, said he hasn't seen a new full-time worker join his crew in over seven years. They are all being phased out in favour of labour hire casuals on less pay. He said. Any First World country that declares they are a fair and just society while having two people doing the exact same job and being paid differently—tens of thousands of dollars differently— … is demeritorious. I commended Mr Goulevitch for his restraint, because I'd describe it as a bloody disgrace. What is even more disgraceful is that we have a Prime Minister who was willing to spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to keep that system alive. It is indefensible. It isn't just coalminers in Queensland and the Hunter who are being shafted by the mining sector and the Morrison government. The job security committee also heard from the electricians who are working on major iron and gold projects out west. They are also being forced onto labour hire contracts rather than being employed directly. These sparkies would only speak to the committee in camera. After hearing their evidence, it was very clear why they wouldn't speak out publicly. They revealed that labour hire companies are using software called ERMS to record and track any workers who speak out about their pay and conditions, any workers who speak to a union and any workers who speak out about safety issues. There is an online database that the labour hire companies can all access, and they are blacklisting mine workers who speak out or stand up for their rights. Of course, that isn't all. The electricians told us it was common to get hired for a job at a remote mine site for $60 an hour. Once you have flown in, you get told the rate is actually $50 per hour. Then you have a choice of either taking the lower rate or waiting around camp, without pay, until the end of the week for the next flight. They told us about the disgraceful conditions of the housing and food at these remote mine sites. One witness had caught scabies multiple times from hot-bedding and the company not cleaning or maintaining the sanitary precautions that are necessary in those sorts of situations. They told us about what they call 'suicide shifts'—four weeks on, one week off. One of the electricians said he had seen two people take their own lives on the mine site. One had hung himself in his room, and the very next day someone else was moving into it. Those harrowing stories are what is really going on in mine sites around Australia. In 1996, 94 per cent of mine workers in the Queensland coal sector were directly employed. Today, the number is just 50 per cent. I asked the mining companies and the labour hire companies why they're doing this. The answer is obvious. It's obvious to everyone, and it's certainly obvious to everyone working in the industry; it's about cutting costs, silencing dissent and maximising profits and an imbalance in labour bargaining. The spin they came up with was obscene. The response was that it's actually the mine workers who want to live and work like this. One labour hire firm, One Key, said: Experience tells us that employees enjoy this flexibility and in many cases, enjoy the benefits of casual employment. What One Key is saying is that employees apparently enjoy being paid 24 per cent less than the direct employees of the mine operator, doing the exact same job on the exact same rosters. They're saying that the employees enjoy not receiving appropriate leave entitlements, that they enjoy being sacked with one hour's notice and that they enjoy the fact that, if they speak out, they can be blacklisted from the industry for life. This is an infantile and insulting argument. The committee asked the Isaac Regional Council in the Bowen Basin about those arguments. Councillor Kelly Vea Vea, community leader and deputy mayor, said: … that's as misleading as it is downright offensive … it's really frustrating because mining companies create new workforce structures that deprive workers of genuine choice, and then they say the workers actually didn't want to do that anyway. Mayor Anne Baker said of the labour hire in the region: … there can be absolutely no mistake that this completely undermines the socioeconomic health of our regional and remote communities and is an offensive insult that continues to be allowed to happen. I couldn't agree more. In the Isaac region and around Australia, in industries that previously provided good, middle-class jobs—they paid enough to put food on the table, raise a family and maintain a home—we're now seeing pay and conditions stripped away so that middle-class jobs are no longer receiving middle-class pay. The industrial relations system is broken. It needs to be rectified. People need to have the appropriate bargaining strength to deal with these sorts of rorts and rip-offs, and the unethical companies that are competing with good companies and gaming the system, whether it's in coalmining or in other industries, need to be held to account. Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder 31 12:59 Senator GRIFF 76760 South Australia [by video link] I rise to belatedly speak on the community affairs report on effective approaches to prevention, diagnosis and support of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. This was an inquiry I initiated in 2019 with the hope of building awareness of FASD and shaking up the slow progress on tackling this insidious condition. I was not in a position to speak on the report when it was first tabled in March this year, or since, but would now like to take the opportunity to put a deserving spotlight on this excellent report and to particularly thank the community secretariat for its hard work. The report follows the 2012 report on FASD conducted in the other place, titled FASD: the hidden harm, which was another report on a condition which at that time was only starting to be understood in Australia. Unfortunately, like many reports in this and the other place, that report gathered dust. There was no government response to the report and a smattering of piecemeal efforts in this place. Before I launched the 2019 inquiry, only $20 million was dedicated to FASD-specific activities in more than six years. This included just $7 million over two years to deliver on a national FASD action plan. When you consider the reach and impact of FASD in every community, that amounts to serious neglect. However, I'm happy and relieved that, since that time, the government's commitment has grown and now totals around $75 million, including $25 million for a national awareness campaign and almost $24 million announced in September to improve diagnostic and support services. The government acknowledged its funding commitment in its women's budget statement and it also acknowledged that FASD is 'fully preventable'. That says to me that we have a burden to act. We must act. If we don't do everything we can to prevent this condition and to support those who are born with it, we are abrogating our responsibility as legislators. The government will fail its most vulnerable. Why does this matter so much? It matters because FASD has no cure. This means the best tools we have are awareness and prevention. The developmental, cognitive, behavioural and health impacts of FASD are lifelong. Think of it as a condition that robs a child of their full potential. It causes problems with memory, learning, attention, impulse control, communication, planning ability, understanding of consequences, emotional regulation, social and life admin skills, speech and language. Children with FASD will struggle at school, and school is often the first time a parent will be aware their child is behind. FASD often results in poorer academic and employment outcomes, higher rates of homelessness and incarceration, and higher rates of mental health issues and substance abuse. As I said previously, this is a preventable condition. The Senate report made 32 recommendations to improve the nation's response to FASD, addressing everything from prevention to improving diagnosis and support. I'm very eagerly looking forward to the government's response to each of these 32 recommendations, all of them sensible and reaching across every field that FASD touches—education, disability services, families and parenting support, professional training in the criminal justice system and more. One of the recommendations is for the government to fund a FASD prevalence study so we can finally determine the known, not just suspected, FASD rate in Australia. We know Australia has one of the highest rates of drinking during pregnancy. That means that we must be prepared to learn then that we have one of the highest rates of FASD in the world. That would be an uncomfortable truth, but, once we do this, we will know the magnitude of what we're really dealing with. At the moment, it is estimated that anywhere between two and nine per cent of the population has misdiagnosed or undiagnosed FASD. I very much suspect that, with our strong social drinking culture, it will be far higher. We know, from the Senate inquiry, that there is still confusion over whether and how much a woman can drink in pregnancy. The myth persists that drinking in the third trimester is somehow okay. Thankfully, the NHMRC drinking guidelines now make it clear that no alcohol is safe at any stage of pregnancy. Previous drinking guidelines let down pregnant women. FASD is an insidious condition—invisible, even—because children and adults with FASD will appear normal and often have a normal IQ. But their executive functioning is compromised. A person with FASD can struggle with memory, struggle to understand and follow instructions, struggle to pay attention and struggle to understand the consequences of their actions and decisions. They're not intentionally unreliable, undisciplined, lazy or forgetful. But the effect of alcohol on their developing brains means they will always struggle with basic life skills and abilities that you and I take for granted, such as making and keeping appointments. Managing this often requires an external brain, someone who helps with the everyday tasks of planning and reminding. Children and adults with FASD have a higher incidence of incomplete schooling, difficulty holding down a job, homelessness, trouble with the law, mental illness and substance abuse, as well as difficulties with relationships, living independently and parenting children safely. When I first learned all of this, I could not ignore it; I wanted to bang the drum and make change. I'm pleased the government agreed to invest in an awareness campaign as a small first step, but the inquiry showed how far we still are from where we need to be. Not even the medical profession is united on the gravity of what we are facing. I was shocked to hear, during the inquiry, that there are obstetricians and midwives who refuse to have a difficult conversation with women about their drinking, because, for them, being able to continue seeing a woman during her pregnancy is more important than the life outcomes of the baby she will deliver. Just think about that for a minute: they are more interested in keeping a patient on their books than looking after the health of her unborn baby. Some of you may think I'm overreacting. Maybe you know women who drank in pregnancy, and their kids seem fine. There are a few things to note. Firstly, alcohol doesn't affect all women and all pregnancies equally. For some it will have catastrophic impacts on their baby and, for others, nothing noticeable. Secondly, FASD is often misdiagnosed, or masked by comorbidities. Often it is simply missed. The child may just be thought of as wilful and naughty, or forgetful, when in fact that is not true. As the inquiry was told, the cognitive and behavioural impacts of FASD often mean that someone with the condition can't—not won't. Only a tiny proportion of children with suspected FASD have actually been diagnosed, and it's nigh on impossible to be diagnosed as an adult. There are a number of reasons for this. Key among them is the difficulty of accessing diagnostic services. There aren't enough paediatricians trained to identify FASD, and there are only a handful of multidisciplinary clinics that offer the full spectrum of diagnostic services. If you live in a rural or regional area, diagnosis and treatment is much more difficult—impossible even. A groundbreaking study of the Banksia Hill youth detention centre in WA found that 36 per cent of detained youth had FASD, the highest known rate in any custodial setting in the world. This has gone undiagnosed despite all the contact these youth have had with government agencies over their lives. When you think of how insidious this condition is and how its tentacles reach across every sphere of an individual's life in society, you realise how profound an impact FASD is having right under our noses. It needs to be tackled head on, through prevention and through better diagnosis, recognition and treatment. Until now, we've been almost ignoring it. We need to be brave enough to look at FASD with open eyes, understand its true prevalence, commit ourselves to prevention and not shy away from the task of diagnosing and supporting those with FASD, wherever we find them—every classroom, every home and every suburb. If we can do that, our society will be so much better for it. (Time expired) Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Beijing Winter Olympics 33 13:09 Senator McGRATH 217241 Queensland Today, the ABC has again shown it is incapable of responsibly spending taxpayers' money. The ABC has been raised with a silver spoon in hand and now the self-entitled beast has once again shown that, in its eyes, it is above the government, the legal system and its funders, the taxpayer. The ABC, once again, has taken its position within the Australian community and tried to push its own agenda, disregarding any obligation of impartiality. But today a strong message has been sent which I hope Ita Buttrose and David Anderson hear loud and clear. In June, I wrote to the ABC chair about widely-held concerns over the ABC spending taxpayer funds to cover the legal expenses of Louise Milligan's defence against legal action commenced by the member for Bowman. It is not the first time Ms Milligan has used her platform at the ABC to post a series of tweets in what, at best, can only be described as unprofessional conduct. My letter asked Ita Buttrose why the publicly funded ABC was footing the bill for Milligan's legal costs, despite Louise Milligan admitting that the tweets were not made in a work capacity as an ABC journalist. This begs the question as to why the ABC would pay the legal fees of an employee's actions as a private citizen. On the flipside, Andrew Laming, the member for Bowman, paid his costs out of his own pocket. In response, the ABC's managing director, David Anderson, refused to address the specific concerns of mine due to the ongoing legal proceedings. Well, those legal proceedings concluded this morning. I am pleased to inform the Senate that Mr Laming and Ms Milligan's dispute has been resolved by consent orders. But, unfortunately for the Australian taxpayer, Louise Milligan has agreed to pay $80,000 to Andrew Laming to compensate him and also pay his legal costs—an admission of liability. The $80,000 do not include her own legal fees to date, which are still to be covered by the ABC, with the taxpayer effectively playing sugar daddy. I quote the member for Bowman's brief statement. He said: My case is an example of how a false allegation can be quickly and widely disseminated over social media by persons who have no direct/personal knowledge of what actually happened ... I condemn the actions of supposed investigative journalists, media personalities and political identities using social media to make unwanted attacks of this nature. It wasn't just Ms Milligan. The member for Bowman also welcomed public apologies from culprits who have used their position in the Australian community to defame him, including Senator Hanson-Young, Senator Murray Watt, Derryn Hinch and Queensland state Labor MP Don Brown. I also question the conduct of Senator Keneally, who has appropriately deleted a tweet regarding this matter but is yet to apologise to the member for Bowman. In light of today's judgement, I suggest Senator Keneally reconsider her position on contrition posthaste or start transferring her assets into someone else's name. Despite the significance of today's judgement, I am unsure that this will make a difference to mitigate wilful character assassination in the absence of facts. Twitter is the preferred platform of the ABC vigilante crusaders. While these smart alecs believe their words attack those of us on the Right, ironically their sneering tweets billboard their own intolerance. Surprisingly, I'm happy for the ABC staff to keep attacking us deplorables as their sniping shines a light on their partisan hypocrisy, but I don't want the taxpayers paying their legal costs. Where ABC identities—not in the course of their job, I stress—defame or libel people, they personally should pay the legal costs and any damages. I do support and will always support legal protection for journalists engaged in the noble art of the fourth estate, but, if they say it, they should pay for it. The national broadcaster should not be a taxpayer funded law firm, wasting money defending witless, feckless, partisan personal views that are expressed on the allegedly personal but surprisingly professional social media accounts of staff. The only excuse the ABC could offer in a statement earlier today was that it 'decided to pay Ms Milligan's costs in this matter' due to 'particular and exceptional circumstances'. I'll repeat that: 'particular and exceptional circumstances'. But it didn't explain what those particular and exceptional circumstances were. The statement also said that Ms Milligan's posts were made 'in good faith'. It is a shame that one of the ABC's self-acclaimed leading investigative journalists could get it so wrong, make defaming allegations and then hide behind a claim that they were made 'in good faith', with little regard for the effect of such statements when they are wrong. Many would say that this is wilful carelessness and the ABC is complicit in this behaviour due to agreeing to pay Ms Milligan's legal fees. By continuing to pay Louise Milligan's legal fees for a personal post, the ABC is directly subverting its obligation to impartiality, which it has recently tried to uphold in a new social media policy. In an email from David Anderson to all staff, sent earlier this week, he states: 'What is separately created and posted on personal social media accounts is editorially and legally the responsibility of the owner of the accounts.' David Anderson concedes that Ms Milligan's posts are the responsibility of Ms Milligan and therefore is distancing the ABC from the private posts of ABC employees. It begs the question of why the Australian taxpayer is paying Ms Milligan's legal bill, a question that remains unanswered. David Anderson's email also recommends that staff remove reference to the ABC from their social media accounts and provide disclaimers that the accounts are their personal views. It is worth noting that Ms Milligan's Twitter handle has no such disclaimer and still references the ABC and its Four Corners program, a move which can only be described as flagrantly ignoring the instructions of the managing director—the same managing director who made the decision for the taxpayer to foot her legal bill for personal posts. Today I've written to David Anderson calling on him to clarify what the 'particular and exceptional circumstances' are behind the reason for paying Ms Milligan's legal costs, given that the conduct occurred on her private social media, and whether this payment remains appropriate in light of the changes to the ABC's social media policy. If so, I encourage the ABC to release the criteria for determining what personal conduct falls within these circumstances, to adequately inform the taxpayer of what other expenses they may be expected to pay for. Earlier this week I, along with colleagues, co-signed a letter calling for a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing. The reason for the diplomatic boycott is the serious abuses of human rights occurring in China, particularly to the one million ethnic Uighurs suffering in detention camps. The situation there is increasingly being labelled by human rights organisations, research institutes and national parliaments as genocide. We should not let the 2022 Winter Olympics be the modern 1936 Berlin Olympics. The diplomatic boycott would not involve athletes or those directly involved with Australians competing in the games. Such a boycott would be unfair to those who've trained so hard to compete in the games. Nor should a government ever tell its athletes where they can and cannot compete. But I call upon all colleagues and I call upon the government to support a diplomatic boycott of the Winter Olympics being held in Communist China. Marine Parks: Indian Ocean Territories, Cashless Debit Card, Asylum Seekers 34 13:20 Senator McCARTHY 122087 Northern Territory [by video link] The Indian Ocean Territories of Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands are an incredibly unique and fascinating part of my constituency of the Northern Territory. The government, through its agency Parks Australia, has moved to establish the marine national parks around both territories, covering up to 740,000 square kilometres, which will make it the second largest of Australia's marine parks after the Coral Sea Marine Park. Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) Islands have some of the most fascinating ecosystems in the world. It's a critical area for spawning bluefin tuna and has many unique habitats and species. Adding the marine park to the Indian Ocean Territories is an opportunity to benefit the aspirations of the Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) communities and bring about a globally significant conservation outcome. But it didn't happen without a battle. Thankfully, this has superseded plans, initially by the department of regional development and territories, to impose fishing regulations on the Indian Ocean Territories—something that was universally opposed by the islanders, as it would have unfairly impacted their cultural practice of sharing the seafood catch amongst the community by the imposition of bag limits, meaning that those who own a boat and were fit enough to fish couldn't take a larger catch to share with the elderly or infirm to assist them with their diets. This was particularly so for the Cocos Malay community, who are rich in culture but not so materially rich, and who do rely on the bounty from the ocean as their main source of protein and a big part of their staple diet. The regulations also proposed to ban fishing altogether in the most accessible areas to shore fishing within the stunning Cocos Lagoon. The Cocos Malay and Christmas Island communities have traditionally fished their waters for generations without an apparent impact on fish stocks. Yet the proposed regulations were based on data collected from Western Australian coastal waters with no suggestion or evidence that communities were fishing unsustainably. They're small communities and the catch has always been for consumption only. So, after nearly two years of apparent indifference by the territories department and Assistant Minister Marino during which the communities' universal opposition to those fishing regulations seemed to fall on deaf ears, it is a relief now to know that those ridiculous plans have been shelved in favour of the proposed marine parks. I'm advised that community led fisheries management models and ranger programs will be developed, and I'm keen to see that and will be watching very closely to see that these initiatives do take place. I have been briefed by personnel from the Pew Charitable Trusts who were working closely with both communities on what they would like these cooperative management models to look like, and I certainly commend the work of Pew and their dedication and passionate advocacy in pursuing these things, in particular with the Christmas and Cocos islanders. I will certainly be assisting to make those representations to Parks Australia. I commend Pew for their work. It is a shame, though, that it took so long for the government to respond to what was overwhelming opposition by the islanders, who put forward many constructive suggestions to improve the draft fishing ordinance but were ignored, despite strong advocacy by influential community members. On Christmas Island, these included local government president, Gordon Thomson, an incredible figure on the island and a great representative for the people there; Chris Su, another incredible young man who's got an outstanding career in the region and speaks very passionately on behalf of the people he represents; and Regine Anderson. On Cocos (Keeling) Islands, advocates included local government president, Aindil Minkom, Siti Yaserie, John Clunies-Ross, Jamil Ibram, Rahmat Madi Signa, Tini Signa and Shakirin Keegan. These are incredible people who represented very strongly the concerns of the Cocos (Keeling) islanders. Even the younger generation of Cocos (Keeling) islanders joined in the advocacy, because they wanted to protect and preserve their ability to fish naturally for their families. The younger ones wrote an open letter objecting to the proposed new laws, and I want to mention their names because they deserve to be mentioned. I hope they're listening. The letter was signed by Zabidi Abedin, Alfin Wezen, Mazuansha Bentley, Daud Radal, Jufri Jason, Syukire Ennery, Siddiq Juljali, Musa Shakirin, Adi Mansa, Ismah Mansa, Azrul Azah, Zahlan Hamiril, Zamani Charlie, Fadulah Balmut, Fikrie Balmut, Akmal Abdul Halim, Zain Zaikat, and Izahan Fazli. I mention all of these people because I hope they are listening. I commend every single one of you in your battle to preserve your way of life as Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) islanders. I am incredibly proud to represent you. I'd like to go to another issue in the few minutes that I have left: the cashless debit card. We know this government has plans to force as many welfare recipients as possible onto the cashless debit card. We know that, despite there being absolutely no evidence that the card works to reduce social harms—just the opposite, in fact—the government still continue to push this agenda. We know they have no qualms about doing whatever they can to bring in an Australia-wide cashless debit card, to penalise and demonise people receiving social security payments, to control their lives and to punish people for the crime of poverty. But I must say that I was very surprised to see the federal government is now pushing its agenda on to local government councils in the Northern Territory. The July edition of the Alice Springs Town Council newsletter has a complete page singing the wonderful praises, supposedly, of the cashless debit card. On page 11 of the newsletter, there's nearly a full page item pushing the cashless debit card, telling people how they can manage and how they can change from income management to the cashless debit card. As well as talking about the so-called benefits of the cashless debit card over a basics card, the Alice Springs Town Council newsletter informs residents that the Department of Social Services will be visiting their communities in the coming months to talk about it. That's not such a bad thing, of course; you want to communicate what you are doing. But the question here is about the federal government advertising in a local council newsletter. Nowhere in that newsletter does it say that this is a federal government promotion or federal government advertisement. So there are a lot of questions that need to be asked about the integrity of that particular process. I guess it's just a coincidence that the lord mayor and the deputy mayor of Alice Springs just happen to be running for the conservatives in the next federal election. In the last minute that I have left, I do make a plea again to the Senate on behalf of the Maghames family, who are now the only ones in the Darwin facility: Yaghoob and his wife Malakeh and their children, who are in their thirties, Abbas and Hajar. I spoke about Hajar yesterday in the Senate when she was taken to Royal Darwin Hospital by ambulance. Her family were not allowed to go with her. Hajar has now returned from hospital to the detention centre near the airport. We still have no more news on what awaits them. They all remain deeply distressed, unable to leave, with no choice and no control over their lives. As I said to the Senate last week, this week and consistently, this family would be very welcomed, here in the Northern Territory. Chief Minister Michael Gunner has written to the Morrison government expressing this view, and I absolutely and wholeheartedly support these calls. I call on the Australian Senate, the Australian Parliament, to do everything it can. I'm urging the Morrison government to release this family into the community here in Darwin, on Larrakia country. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 281558 It being 1.30 pm, I shall now proceed to two-minute statements. STATEMENTS 36 STATEMENTS Landcare Australia 36 13:30 Senator CICCONE 281503 Victoria [by video link] Last Thursday, Australia's most dedicated and passionate Landcarers were given recognition in front of over 2,400 attendees online at the National Landcare Awards. Landcare champion Costa Georgiadis was uplifting in his role as MC, particularly in a year that has been a challenging one for the Landcare community. Having been postponed due to the pandemic last year, the event was shifted online to provide Landcarers with an opportunity to gather online to celebrate both individual and collective achievements of the community. As co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Landcare, I was delighted to have been invited to present the Coastcare Award to the Dhimurru Aboriginal Corporation from the Northern Territory. The group was recognised for its work protecting 70 kilometres of beaches tarnished by marine debris within their Indigenous protected area. An important nesting habitat for marine wildlife, the once pristine coastline is being inundated with some of the highest densities of plastic rubbish in the world. I'd also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the achievements of this year's other Landcare champions and finalists. In particular, I'd like to make special mention of Victorian farmer Andrew Stewart, who won the Bob Hawke Landcare Award. The Corangamite landholder's environmental and sustainable agricultural advancements included increasing woody vegetation on the Yan Yan Gurt West Farm by planting 50,000 trees and shrubs and bringing more than 5,000 people to the property to educate them about sustainable land management practices. For over 30 years, Landcare has played a leading role in advocating a balance between sustainable land management practices and environmental conversation. The Parliamentary Friends of Landcare looks forward to continuing to work with our many Landcarers around the country and supporting these important traditions. Tokyo Olympic Games 36 13:32 Senator CHANDLER 264449 Tasmania While the Tokyo Olympic Games have sadly come to an end, we can relish in the success of our athletes and the welcome distraction their performance provided from the pandemic. Australian athletes claimed a total of 46 medals, making it one of our most successful games in history, with 17 gold, seven silver and 22 bronze. I believe I can speak for all Tasmanians when I say we are extremely proud of our local athletes, with a total of 12 sportsmen and sportswomen competing as part of the Australian Olympic team across sports including swimming, running, basketball and hockey. Four of these athletes medalled in their events. Tasmania's newest legend, Ariarne Titmus, claimed four Olympic medals during the games, including gold in both the women's 200-metre freestyle and 400-metre freestyle. The humble Launceston-born swimmer is only the third Australian to win gold in both of these events at a single Olympic Games, joining Shane Gould and Ian Thorpe in the history books. Eddie Ockenden and Josh Beltz did us proud by winning silver as part of the Kookaburras outfit, which faced off against Belgium in a nailbiter gold-medal match, and Tasmanian-born basketballer Chris Goulding claimed bronze playing with the Boomers basketball team, the first time our men's team has won an Olympic medal. Congratulations as well to Stewart McSweyn, Daniel Watkins, Georgia Baker, Richie Porte, Jacob Birtwhistle, Sarah Hawe, Ciona Wilson and Nathaniel Atkinson for their magnificent efforts in the games. You did us all very proud. Our Tasmanian athletes continue to inspire on the international stage. I'm certain that their performance will serve to encourage the next generation of Australian athletes to get involved in sport. COVID-19: International Travel 37 13:34 Senator FARUQI 250362 New South Wales [by video link] Today marks 509 days since Australia's borders closed on 20 March 2020—509 days. This situation has posed such challenges and caused such heartbreak for so many in our community as well as their families and friends overseas. As of today, more than 38,000 Australians are still stranded overseas and want to return home. There are many thousands more living here who are separated from loved ones abroad. I am one of them. For us, there is no time line on when we might see our families again. There is just waiting and waiting and waiting. It is intolerable. Last night was census night. The key part of the census is mapping the changing cultural landscape of this country. People are asked about their ancestry, their languages and where their families are from. The story the census has told us over the years is one of a multicultural country. Aside from First Nations people, every person who lives here is either a migrant or descended from immigrants. The overseas-born population now sits at about 30 per cent, and a further 20 per cent have at least one parent born overseas. This is huge by international comparisons, but you wouldn't know it from the way this country, throughout the pandemic, has relied so heavily on border closures as its primary way of dealing with the pandemic. A quick fix has become a long-term solution, and it has done enormous harm to millions of migrants. The vaccine rollout was deprioritised due to the reliance on closed borders. When the PM said, 'It's not a race,' we heard, 'We are in no rush to reopen.' This mindset has to be challenged. It is a race—for public health but also for the future of this multicultural country. JobKeeper Payment 37 13:36 Senator SHELDON 168275 New South Wales [by video link] Anyone wondering what side the Morrison government is on need only look at the way Mr Morrison is dealing with the JobKeeper rorts saga. While billionaires like Gerry Harvey have pocketed tens of millions of dollars in JobKeeper, the Morrison government has refused to do anything to recover those payments. The independent Parliamentary Budget Office has revealed that $4.6 billion was paid out to companies that actually increased their turnover in the pandemic. For more than 365,000 employers, real-world turnover did not actually fall below the threshold for the April-to-June period last year. These organisations accrued about $12.5 billion in JobKeeper payments during that time. This waste of taxpayer money is morally outrageous. On the flip side, it has now been revealed that Mr Morrison has issued 11,771 welfare recipients with debt recovery notices for overpayments of JobKeeper. So, if you're a billionaire like Gerry Harvey, Mr Morrison will stand up for you in parliament and protect you. But, if you're a hardworking Australian struggling to get by—perhaps you've lost shifts or lost your job because of the pandemic, a common story for so many—if you're relying on some support from the federal government, from Centrelink, to make ends meet, we know Mr Morrison will hound you to the ends of the earth for every last penny, just as he hounded vulnerable Australians through robodebt, a system he personally set up when he was Minister for Social Services. The Australian middle class is shrinking and it is increasingly being shoved into low-paid, insecure work. (Time expired) COVID-19 37 13:38 Senator ROBERTS 266524 Queensland Security is not provided by police and military who are busy harassing law-abiding citizens for the supposed crime of dissent. Security is not provided by unelected bureaucrats who never lose their pay. And don't get me started on masks. One Nation believes real security comes from a breadwinner job, owning the family home, being surrounded by family and living in a community where people interact and support each other. COVID restrictions are the reverse of common sense. Separating families and weakening communities is not how a society pulls through a crisis. Nothing shows the contempt for families more than the decision of Labor Premier Dan Andrews to ban visits to parents in their own home yet allow visits to brothels. Labor is sending a clear message: families are bad; brothels are good. That's just sick. Last week, I remarked on the plans to move everyday Australians into small, hive homes. This denies parents the space to allow their adult kids to stay at home longer to save for their own home. Without this leg-up, the security of homeownership is further out of our kids' reach. Liberal-National and Labor governments have spent 30 years making job security worse by exporting jobs while importing millions of new workers with no job to go to. The result is casualisation of the workforce, lower wages and terrible job security. Parliaments are exploiting this by blackmailing workers into getting the vaccine. Vaccination under duress contravenes the government's own guidelines. The outcome from this whole display of pathetic governance is a growing divide between vaxxed and unvaxxed, which is fracturing families and communities and robbing us of security. Protests and vaccine hesitancy are proof that society understands what parliaments do not: we will not be divided. We have one flag above us. We are one community. We are one nation. Port of Newcastle 38 13:40 Senator HENDERSON ZN4 Victoria I rise to speak about serious concerns regarding the lack of regulatory oversight at the half Chinese owned Port of Newcastle. Why is this of particular interest to me, as a Victorian senator? It matters because the port is the largest coal export terminal in the world. Coal is our second-largest export commodity, and the port accounts for 40 per cent of Australia's coal output. The port is also a monopoly. Hunter Valley coal producers have no alternative but to use it. Regulatory oversight is desperately required. The port is 50 per cent owned by China Merchants Group, a Chinese state owned corporation. China Merchants Group's stated ambition is for the port to implement its port-park-city development model under the Belt and Road Initiative, as it has done in ports in China and globally. The lack of regulatory oversight means China has the capacity to increase coal export costs for punitive reasons at any time. As is well known, China has already banned Australian coal imports in its own country, and that is obviously of deep concern. Before China banned Australian coal imports, Australia was China's second-biggest supplier of coal, with trade accounting for around 18 per cent of Australia's thermal coal and 24 per cent of Australia's coking coal. China is now paying other countries close to double the amount for coal, a premium, to punish Australia. Since it was privatised, the port has used its monopoly position to increase user charges on coal exports by nearly 120 per cent. This is of deep concern to the ACCC chair, who said: It is bad for the economy when bottleneck infrastructure, at the end of a crucial value chain, is in the hands of a company with unfettered market power. Given the port refuses to negotiate with coal producers, it is time for the ACCC to intervene. (Time expired) Prime Minister 38 13:42 Senator GALLAGHER ING Australian Capital Territory Our Prime Minister doesn't like to take responsibility. We saw it with the bushfires, we saw it with Brittany Higgins, and we've seen it with his ducking and weaving over ministerial scandals. Of course, the ultimate failure, impacting every single Australian, is the complete and utter failure of the vaccine rollout and provision of national quarantine. But, amongst all these failures, there is one area where the Prime Minister is truly excelling, one area where he is top of the class, and that is in his ability to hide money in the budget and then spend it for political purposes. It started when Mr Morrison was the Minister for Social Services, in 2015. It was when he was Treasurer that the number of funds and discretionary grant programs exploded. But it is as Prime Minister that he has been truly able to hone his craft. Since the 2014 budget, this government has created more than 150 funds, totalling almost $70 billion in public money. They are multibillion dollar slush funds set up and then topped up again and again as the money rolls into the only electorates this Prime Minister cares about. Here's how he does it, how he rorts public money in broad daylight, without shame or consequence. Step 1: appropriate money by promising it's there for all Australians. Step 2: make sure there are no pesky guidelines, applications or expressions of interest attached to the money. Step 3: restrict access to the money to government members, particularly those in marginal seats; use spreadsheets, maps and the electoral pendulum to carve up the dollars, and agree it between the Prime Minister and the minister's office. Step 4: make the minister the decision-maker, to protect the Prime Minister, and then—step 5—have the Prime Minister, in return, protect the minister. What a tidy little arrangement for the Liberal Party! Australian people foot the bill, the vast majority of Australians never see a cent, and the Liberal Party get to raid the Australian government budget as though it's a fundraising machine. My message to the Prime Minister is: we know what you're doing, and more and more Australians are cottoning on to it too. Some call it corruption, some call it a rort and others call it pork-barrelling, but it's business as usual for this government. (Time expired) Point Peron 38 13:44 Senator STEELE-JOHN 250156 Western Australia [by video link] Our precious places should be enjoyed by all of us, not just billionaires who can afford yachts and bayside megamansions. Developers and the Liberal Party have had their eyes on the beautiful area of Mangles Bay for many years now. It's not too far from my home town of Rockingham. Time and time again they have tried to turn this precious place of beaches and bushland into a private canal development and marina. In response was formed the Hands Off Point Peron campaign. Led by Dawn Jecks, this campaign rallied the community to take action, to make submissions, to support the community, to participate in consultations and to write a fair few letters to the editor along the way. Including and involving key leaders in the Rockingham community, like James Mumme, the campaign put together mountains of evidence. It made sure to hold many rallies across the local area so that decision-makers heard, clearly and strongly, that our community said no to this development. It is with such pride and joy that I note that Point Peron has now been protected, that this community campaign has succeeded and that Point Peron will be forever protected as an A class reserve. It is a win for the community and it is a win for the little penguins, dolphins and seals that call the area home. As we face the reality of the climate crisis, it is important now more than ever to celebrate campaigners like Dawn and James and to protect these precious places for generations to come. Forestry 39 13:46 Senator PATRICK 144292 South Australia I have some concerns about the Australian plantation timber industry and I've had them for a while. In September 2018 the government announced a National Forest Industries Plan, touted as a commitment to the timber industry and an investment in Australia's future. The aim of the plan was to plant a billion new plantation trees. Minister Littleproud stated at the time: Australia will need to plant a billion new trees over the next decade to meet demand in 2050, particularly sawlogs for building and construction. This meant planting 100 million trees per year. That's on top of the roughly 70 million trees that need to be planted each year just to replenish harvesting. The billion-trees announcement came before the timber loss in the devastating fires just over a year ago which affected 130,000 hectares of commercial plantation. Replenishment of these would require about 130 million trees to be planted. The department recently advised the Senate that about 2,800 hectares have been planted. That's roughly 2.8 million trees, against an annual target of 170 million needed. At this rate, we can forget meeting the 2050 target; it will take 357 years to hit a billion trees. Today I learned that Kangaroo Island Plantation Timbers is, for a variety of reasons, exiting the timber industry and will revert its almost 19,000 hectares to agricultural land. That's a loss of roughly seven million adult trees. We're going backwards. The government must get this plan back on track. COVID-19: Political Cartoons 39 13:48 Senator LINES 112096 Western Australia Thank goodness for Australia's political cartoonists, I say. This week on Insiders we saw the host of Talking Pictures, Mike Bowers, with his guest cartoonist, David Pope, summarising the week's cartoons. Political cartoonists can often depict in their art what is much more difficult to say in words. What Australians saw is that the Prime Minister has become a laughing stock. He is no longer believable on anything, particularly not on the vaccine rollout and quarantine—the two jobs he had during this pandemic. What better than for Australia's cartoonists to use the Olympics as a way of portraying our bumbling, backflipping, twisting-himself-into-knots PM? Fiona Katauskas had the PM backflipping 'with a bit too much spin' on now suddenly supporting lockdowns. David Rowe, in his cartoon, had the PM on the mat, twisting and contorting on all things COVID with a 'No jab, no pay' tatt on his arm. Rowe predicts this is a sure sign that, after ridiculing Labor's plan to pay people for getting a jab, the PM will backflip on this issue sooner or later and agree with Labor. Jon Kudelka had his marvellous placebo cartoon based on the PM's road map. Of course, we all know that a placebo is a trick or false medication given to patients who think they're getting something but are not, very much like the PM's plan. Lastly, there was Peter Broelman, who drew the PM and the Treasurer in a race, except they're doing the Australian crawl because apparently it's not a race. Despite his syndicated op-ed in papers last week, the PM evoked the Olympic spirit, which surely is about competing against the world's best and, indeed, trying to win. COVID-19: International Travel 39 13:50 Senator McKIM JKM Tasmania Holders of subclass 188 visas, also known as wealthy investor visas, need to be wealthy enough to have invested at least $1½ million in Australia. Holders of these visas are automatically exempt from the travel bans which apply to holders of other temporary visas, some of which also apply to Australian citizens. Subclass 188 visa holders can come and go from Australia as they please, with no need to apply to the Australian Border Force for an exemption from the travel bans, just because they are wealthy enough to have 1.5 million bucks in spare change. Recently, the government announced that Australian citizens who live overseas will now need to apply for an exemption in order to leave Australia. What that means is that wealthy investors who are not Australian citizens have more rights to leave Australia than all Australian citizens have, now including Australian citizens who live overseas. Once again, it's one rule for the superwealthy, even if they've never lived in our country, and another rule for everyone else, even if they are Australian citizens, Australian permanent residents or temporary visa holders who have built their lives in Australia. This is not good enough. The government has to explain why superwealthy holders of temporary visas have more rights to travel across our border than Australian citizens and holders of other temporary visas do—one rule for the rich and famous and another rule for everyone else. If you're a wealthy investor visa holder or a famous sports star, you can come and go while all the rest of us have to obey the rules. Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games 40 13:52 Senator ASKEW 281558 Tasmania What an amazing fortnight of sport we have just witnessed! Our congratulations and thanks go to all Australian athletes and officials for an outstanding effort at the 2020 Olympics. Today I would like to acknowledge one of those athletes. When Ariarne Titmus swam her way to gold in Tokyo, she had the collective will of Australia behind her, but the loudest cheers were coming from Tasmania. More specifically, those excited cheers were coming from Launceston, where Ariarne was born and spent her formative swimming years at the Riverside and Launceston aquatic clubs. Students at her former school, St Patrick's College, were watching as she made her way through the heats and booked her finals berth. Teachers Tony Cullen and Katrina von Stieglitz were the St Patrick's swim team coach and manager when Ariarne was a student, and both knew then she was destined for big things. Well-known and respected members of the Launceston community, Ariarne's parents, Steve and Robyn, made the decision in 2016 to relocate to Queensland with daughters Ariarne and Mia to advance Ariarne's career. Ariarne represented Australia at the 2017 world championships and broke the women's 400-metre freestyle world record at the 2018 world short course championships. She also claimed three gold medals at the Commonwealth Games. It's hard to believe that Tokyo was Ariarne's first Olympic Games. In spectacular fashion, she won gold medals in the 200- and 400-metre freestyle events, silver in the 800-metre freestyle and bronze in the four-by-200-metre freestyle relay, the first Tasmanian to win an individual Olympic gold medal and the first to win multiple gold medals at one Olympic Games. Now aged 20, Ariarne has more Olympic campaigns ahead, and she has inspired a new generation of Dolphins to follow her personal motto and be the best they can be. On that note, all the best to Todd Hodgetts, Alexandra Viney and Deon Kenzie as they represent Australia in the Paralympics starting on 24 August. Cabaero, Ms Lina 40 13:54 Senator AYRES 16913 New South Wales [by video link] Over the weekend, Australia lost one of its quiet heroes. Lina Cabaero was a lifelong activist and feminist and the leader of Asian Women at Work, a key community organisation in Sydney. Her path to activism started as a student in the Philippines—a veterinary science student, in fact—protesting the Marcos dictatorship. They were brutally repressed by that corrupt dictatorship—murdered, tortured and repressed. Their response was vibrant, expressive music; protest; colourful demonstrations; pickets and strikes. It was that commitment to activism and social justice that she brought to Australia in 1998 and that has greatly enriched the Australian labour movement. Her leadership at Asian Women at Work brought the exploitation of migrant women to the fore, particularly in textiles, in factories and in black-economy outwork. Asian Women at Work came to reflect the vibrant politics that Lina had learnt in the streets of Manila. She brought it to work, workplaces and industrial advocacy, but had also brought the same dancing and singing, calligraphy, painting and drumming. In a society and an economy that too readily excludes these women from view, Lina taught that politics and public expression were a source of power and affirmation and a pathway to change. She made a real difference, including in the provisions of the Fair Work Act that protect the rights of outworkers. She was effective. She will be greatly missed. She'd a young family with Jego—Natasha and Miko. Lina was lost far too young. Our honours system accords awards to Australians who've made a real contribution. One of the tragic aspects of Lina Cabaero's early passing is that we won't get to honour her great contribution during her lifetime. COVID-19: Hospitality and Tourism Industries 40 13:56 Senator HUGHES 273828 New South Wales Today we've seen lockdowns further extended in Victoria and we're seeing extended lockdowns across basically the eastern seaboard, and perhaps during these times there are no businesses more affected than those in hospitality and tourism. Pubs, bars, clubs, restaurants and hotels—all are shut down; no patrons are coming through the door. But, unlike many industries, many of these businesses are fortunate to receive substantial support and guidance from their industry representatives—none more so than the Australian Hotels Association, the AHA. Whilst the AHA remains grateful and supportive of the way the Morrison government has worked with them, I also want to acknowledge some of the companies who have gone over and above for their staff, to maintain engagement and support them through these lockdowns. The Australian Venue Co., AVC—which owns pubs all across this country but is particularly suffering in New South Wales at the moment—has been providing seven-day food packages for all of its hospitality workers from Bungalow 8 for the past few weeks, and not only supporting their own staff but in fact all of us in the community. We've seen the Drinks Group, via Lewis Land Group, providing two days leave for their staff getting the jab. Then we've got the Iris hotel group. They've established a staff wellbeing initiative—a program for staff to be able to engage and maintain mental health throughout this lockdown. But what's been particularly great about this initiative is that it's not just for their staff; they've actually actively engaged with the AHA and asked them to distribute it to their members. So, whilst this is a really tough time for everyone, it is great to see industries who've supported themselves and supported each other. Queenstown: Commonwealth Bank 41 13:58 Senator URQUHART 231199 Tasmania Yesterday or the day before, the Commonwealth Bank notified that they were closing their branch in western Tasmania at the Queenstown site. That is a very isolated area of Tasmania, and we all know how those sorts of communities depend heavily on their bank in those regions. I think it's appalling that, on the day that they announced that they were closing the Queenstown branch, their profit jumped 19.7 per cent—19.7 per cent their profit jumped—when they announced that they would close their branch in this important regional town and not provide this service to the west coast people. The bank announced an $8.8 billion profit to the share market and, at the same time, they have demonstrated contempt to the people and the businesses of Queenstown, in an area that relies on it very heavily, where there are not a lot of people who have internet connections and can do their banking in that way. The PRESIDENT I0Q Order, Senator Urquhart. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 41 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE COVID-19: Morrison Government, COVID-19: New South Wales 41 14:00 Senator O'NEILL 140651 New South Wales My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Birmingham. Today 344 new cases have been reported in New South Wales, with 62 people currently in an ICU, and, tragically, there have been a total of 34 deaths during the current outbreak. Yesterday, an experienced respiratory physician at a Western Sydney hospital issued a stark warning that 'New South Wales is almost certainly on the precipice of a massive deterioration'. Given Mr Morrison has endorsed the New South Wales decision to avoid lockdown, will he now take responsibility for the crisis facing the people of New South Wales? 14:00 Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X South Australia I thank Senator O'Neill for her question. The government indeed takes our share of responsibility for working with New South Wales and the people of New South Wales in what is a very difficult and trying time for them. We have ensured that we support the New South Wales government, through the deployment of ADF personnel, to assist them in relation to enforcement activities and compliance activities around the lockdown that is in place, and we have also provided, as is common practice, additional personnel and resources to assist with the contact-tracing effort underway in New South Wales. We have also, where possible, provided additional access to vaccines for the people of New South Wales, particularly in relation to targeting some of those parts of Sydney that are facing some of the greatest stress and pressures. And so we do recognise the need to take responsibility, to work carefully and closely with New South Wales through these very difficult— An honourable senator interjecting— The PRESIDENT I0Q Order! Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X We know these are trying and difficult times. Across the nation, we are seeking to ensure the continued growth in the vaccine rollout occurs and occurs successfully. I welcome the fact that, in the past 24 hours, some 255,964 doses have been administered, yet another daily record demonstrating the gathering of pace in relation to that vaccine rollout, which is now seeing, on a weekly basis, doses administered for roughly the entire population of Adelaide, across the country every single week, and that's with the difficulties the rollout has faced, but we are overcoming those and seeing very clearly its growth and success. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator O'Neill, a supplementary question? 14:03 Senator O'NEILL 140651 New South Wales The Western Sydney doctor also said: NSW is suffering from a conspicuous failure of leadership. Are we trying to lock down to eliminate COVID, or are we attempting to vaccinate our way out of this pandemic? Why has Mr Morrison left more than six million Australians currently in lockdown in New South Wales without a clear plan out of this current crisis? 14:03 Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X South Australia The government has been working, as I said, carefully with New South Wales in relation to providing them support, and encouraging them at times to accept support, in relation to the application of the current lockdown and ensuring its success. In terms of the pathway out of crisis, we have also, for the nation, developed the work that's being released by the Doherty Institute, the type of modelling and work that is world-leading in terms of identifying how it is we can ensure that, as the vaccine rollout continues to progress across the country, we have informed evidence based approaches to be able to reduce the scale, scope or necessity of lockdowns in the future. That is a crucially important piece of work to inform us against the delta strain and the enormous additional challenges that that delta strain poses in New South Wales, as it does in many other parts of the world. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator O'Neill, a final supplementary question? 14:04 Senator O'NEILL 140651 New South Wales Khalil from Bankstown tragically lost his parents, 82-year-old Kaoukab and 88-year-old Hachem, to COVID-19 in the same week. His family's bereavement was amplified when they found out that his parents died still waiting to get their vaccinations. People have paid with their lives for Mr Morrison's failure to secure enough vaccines. Isn't it painfully clear that it was always a race— (Time expired) 14:05 Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X South Australia Clearly, I extend my sympathies and the government's sympathies to Khalil and his family and, indeed, all those who have suffered bereavements in Australia—944 through the course of the pandemic—and, of course, the many millions across the rest of the globe. Those comparisons do remain important. Australia, though each of those deaths and each of the challenges of COVID is a tragedy, has managed the pandemic still far better than the rest of the world. In terms of access— Senator O'Neill 140651 They were waiting for their vaccines. Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X I hear you saying they were waiting for vaccines. I do note that more than 80 per cent of those over the age of 70 have received their first vaccine. The majority of those have received their second dose. Those over 70 have been in the priority cohort, and vaccines are available, clearly, for those over 70, with more than 80 per cent— (Time expired) National Security 42 14:06 Senator SCARR 282997 Queensland My question is to the Attorney-General, Senator Cash. Can the Attorney-General advise the Senate how the Liberal-National government is equipping our law enforcement and security agencies with the resources they need to keep Australians safe from violent extremism? 14:06 Senator CASH I0M Western Australia I thank Senator Scarr for the question and I acknowledge his keen interest in keeping Australians safe and in national security. Without a doubt, a fundamental responsibility of the Morrison government is to keep Australians safe and to protect our way of life, our freedoms and our values. We may be in the middle of a global pandemic, but the threat of terrorism, as we know, remains in Australia, as it does in other places around the world. Since the national terrorism threat was raised to 'probable' in September 2014, there have been nine attacks and 21 major disruption operations in response to imminent attacks that were being planned on Australians. There have been 138 people charged as a result of 66 counterterrorism operations since 2014, and there are currently 34 people before the courts for terrorism related offences. To respond to these threats, the Morrison government has now passed 22 tranches of national security legislation. As I said, a fundamental responsibility of the Morrison government is to keep Australians safe. This legislation is helping provide security agencies with the tools and the legal framework necessary to protect Australia but also to combat new attempts and methods of violent extremism. We've legislated to better protect Australians in a number of ways, including by creating a presumption against bail and parole for persons who have demonstrated support for, or links to, terrorist activity, but to also enable the continued detention of high-risk terrorists. We take our responsibility to the Australian people seriously. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Scarr, a supplementary question? 14:08 Senator SCARR 282997 Queensland With Australians spending more time than ever online during the COVID-19 pandemic, what steps has the government taken to fight violent extremism and the risk of terrorism online and keep Australians safe? 14:09 Senator CASH I0M Western Australia As we saw through Operation Ironside, organised crime and terrorist organisations are getting more sophisticated in their use of technology in their attempts to harm Australians. Over 95 per cent of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation's most dangerous counterterrorism targets use encrypted communications. The Morrison government has bolstered our security agencies with increased funding to continue current operations and also to expand operations to keep finding and fighting extremism online. We've also updated our legislative framework with such legislation as the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Act 2018. This has provided the appropriate powers to our security agencies to capture criminals and to stop the spread of extremist material online as technology develops. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Scarr, a final supplementary question? 14:10 Senator SCARR 282997 Queensland How is the increased investment from the government in our law enforcement and security agencies helping to keep Australia and Australians safe from emerging threats? 14:10 Senator CASH I0M Western Australia The digital world is now the new frontier that organised crime, terrorist and state-sponsored actors are using to threaten Australia and to threaten our way of life. As a result, the government is investing over $1.67 billion through our Cyber Security Strategy 2020 to position Australia to meet the evolving threats and also to improve capabilities to identify and disrupt cybersecurity threats. As a government we've also provided an additional $51.8 million to the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission to combat emerging threats from organised and transnational crime through improved collection, assessment and dissemination of intelligence for law enforcement agencies across Australia. These investments will help us to deal, from a connected and digital Australia, with emerging threats and at the same time protect our way of life. COVID-19: Vaccination 43 14:11 Senator McALLISTER 121628 New South Wales [by video link] My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Health, Senator Colbeck. More than two months ago ATAGI and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists recommended that Pfizer be offered to pregnant women at any stage in their pregnancy. Why did it take the Morrison government a further six weeks to include pregnant women as a priority in the vaccine rollout and a further two weeks to update the national Vaccine Eligibility Checker? 14:12 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] All the way through the pandemic the government has continued to closely follow the health advice provided to us by the AHPPC, by the TGA and by ATAGI. As those pieces of advice have been made available we've incorporated those pieces of advice into the vaccine rollout, and that's what we'll continue to do. We have continued to work methodically through the expansion of the vaccination program to ensure that people who need a vaccine are able to get one as soon as possible and also to incorporate into the vaccination program the appropriate advice coming from the health officials that support us. We have continued to do that at the first opportunity— The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Wong, a point of order? Senator Wong 00AOU We have left this point of order for a minute, because I understand that the minister was talking generally. It was a specific question, not about expansion generally but about the eligibility of pregnant women. And I would ask the minister to be directly relevant to that question. The PRESIDENT I0Q I've let you restate the question. The way I heard the minister's answer, he was talking about advice received from various health bodies and incorporating it into a government program. I do not believe that that is not directly relevant. I've allowed you to restate the point of the question. There's an opportunity to debate the merit of answers after question time. But I believe the minister is being directly relevant. Senator COLBECK 00AOL And the government will continue to methodically and, in accordance with the health advice received from those advising the government, update the advice provided to Australians in support of their receiving a vaccine. We know that the vaccination program has been worked initially based on cohorts, and then there was a decision made through a national cabinet to change that process to work on the basis of age demographics rather than specific cohorts within the community. We have at all times methodically followed the health advice, and we will continue to do that in support of giving every Australian who wants a vaccine the opportunity to have one by the end of this year. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator McAllister, a supplementary question? 14:14 Senator McALLISTER 121628 New South Wales [by video link] Katrina, who is due to give birth in less than two weeks at Blacktown Hospital, in the epicentre of the Sydney outbreak, has been unable to secure an appointment. How many pregnant women in New South Wales have been denied access to vaccines as a result of the Morrison government's failure to secure enough supplies? 14:15 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] I don't accept the characterisation of the question as put by Senator McAllister. We have been very, very open with the Australian people. We've published the supply data for vaccines to demonstrate the availability of vaccines that would be coming into this country to support the vaccination rollout. We've been very, very open with people. We have opened the vaccination program to various age cohorts progressively as supply has enabled us to do that, and we've done that progressively and in cooperation with the states. So I don't accept that people have been denied access to a vaccine. We have continued to develop and grow the rollout. We've been very transparent with Australians by publishing the supply data so that they could understand the availability of vaccines as they came into the country, and the vaccination program rolled out and continues to set records every day. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator McAllister, a final supplementary question? 14:16 Senator McALLISTER 121628 New South Wales [by video link] One 34-year-old pregnant woman who was unable to be vaccinated due to a shortage of supplies asked this: 'What's the point of adding us to 1b of the rollout if you don't have vaccines for us anyway?' What does the minister have to say to Australian women who have been left at increased risk of severe illness and complications for their babies because Mr Morrison failed to secure enough supplies? 14:16 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] The government hasn't failed to secure enough supplies. There are plenty of supplies that will be coming into this country to enable everyone who wants a vaccine to access one by the end of the year. We've been completely transparent with the Australian people with respect to the projections for vaccines as they come into the country. Senator Hughes interjecting— Senator Wong interjecting— The PRESIDENT I0Q Order! Senator Colbeck, I will ask you to stop. I can't hear a word you are saying. Opposition senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT I0Q Order across the chamber! Senator Colbeck. Senator COLBECK 00AOL Thank you, Mr President. We've been completely transparent with the Australian people with respect to supply. We have published the supply projections for vaccines so that people understand which vaccines are coming into the country and when they're coming into the country. So the Labor Party can play its games, it can attempt to undermine confidence in the vaccine rollout, as it has consistently done, but we will continue to provide opportunities in an increasing sense for Australians to physically access a vaccine through the number of outlets and also for supply. (Time expired) Australia's Digital Economy 44 14:18 Senator SMALL 291406 Western Australia My question is to the Minister for Superannuation, Financial Services and the Digital Economy, Senator Hume. On the day that Australia's leading tech companies have come together to launch the Tech Council of Australia, can the minister update the Senate on recently published jobs figures in Australia's digital economy sector? 14:18 Senator HUME 266499 Victoria I thank Senator Small for this timely and important question. Today I was very pleased to welcome the launch of the Tech Council of Australia. This is a new advocacy group promoting the growth of Australia's digital economy and seeking to attract investment to Australia and create jobs across a range of critical Australian industries. The new body is backed by leaders in the Australian tech sector, including Atlassian, AfterPay, Canva and SafetyCulture as well as tech investors such as Blackbird and Square Peg and multinationals such as Microsoft and Google. Today's launch was accompanied by the release of a study that was commissioned by the Tech Council and undertaken by Accenture that highlights that our tech sector is now the third-biggest industry, by value, in Australia and it's also the seventh-biggest employer in Australia, with 861,000 workers—one in 16 Australians—employed in the industry. The report also finds that the sector generated $167 billion in output in the financial year 2021, and the growth in this sector is only going to accelerate. Since 2005, tech sector jobs have grown by 66 per cent compared to an average jobs growth of 27 per cent across the economy, and the tech sector generated 65,000 jobs during the pandemic alone. The Morrison government is ambitious for Australia's economic future and is committed to supporting and accelerating this growth. We are a government keen to meet the demands and take advantage of the opportunities presented by the digital economy, and that's why we welcome the collaboration with the tech sector to meet the Tech Council's ambitious goal of one million tech related jobs by 2025. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Small, a supplementary question? 14:20 Senator SMALL 291406 Western Australia Minister, how is the Morrison government supporting job creation in the digital economy sector, as just one part of our economic recovery from COVID-19? 14:20 Senator HUME 266499 Victoria The Morrison government is backing the tech sector with $2 billion in support invested in the last two budgets alone, and that includes $1.2 billion in the Digital Economy Strategy, which I launched with the Prime Minister in May of this year. This strategy is economy-wide and it's investing to create jobs and grow technologies like artificial intelligence and quantum computing. Importantly, the strategy invests in Australian skills. It invests in empowering Australian small and medium-sized enterprises to grasp the nettle, to upskill their staff, and to digitise their businesses in order to boost productivity and to lower costs. With tax incentives to boost target areas of strength, such as the digital game development incentive, and working in concert with global talent acquisition, we expect Australia to be a premier place to grow and invest in digital technology and to create jobs and opportunities for the future of all Australians. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Small, a final supplementary question? 14:21 Senator SMALL 291406 Western Australia Minister, how is this jobs growth reflected more broadly in the Australian economy? 14:21 Senator HUME 266499 Victoria Getting Australians into jobs is clearly a consistent focus of the Morrison government and it has been especially so in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. In June, the unemployment rate fell to 4.9 per cent and that was down from 5.1 per cent in May. This was the eighth consecutive fall in the unemployment rate and its lowest rate in more than a decade. We on this side of the chamber know that it is an extremely challenging time at present with so many people across the country in lockdown, including in my home state of Victoria. Thousands of Australians are relying on digital technology to keep working, keep learning and keep connected to the people they love. Alongside the economic support delivered by the Morrison government, technology has made it possible for Australians to manage and maintain their lives and livelihoods during the pandemic. When we get to the other side, the Morrison government's $1.2 billion investment in our digital future will keep our economy strong and create the jobs for the future. (Time expired) COVID-19: Vaccination 45 14:22 Senator GRIFF 76760 South Australia My question is to Senator Colbeck, representing the Minister for Health, and relates to the vaccine rollout and booster shots. I asked a series of questions on notice to the health minister in June but, as at right now, the answers remain outstanding. I have a constituent who advised me that they received a first shot of AstraZeneca and a second shot of Pfizer vaccine; however, their Medicare immunisation statement notes, 'This individual has not received or required COVID-19 vaccines,' which is untrue. He decided to get a second dose of AstraZeneca, which means he now has had three COVID shots, to force a correction in his immunisation record. Why can an individual's vaccination status be recorded as incomplete when in fact it is not? 14:23 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania I would be very happy to take specific details of the constituent's case so that I can understand the details of that and provide that information back to the chamber, if that suits Senator Griff. I'd be very pleased to do that. I suspect that where this lies, in respect of having one dose of two different types of vaccine, is it may very well be that the system currently doesn't recognise that as a full vaccination program, given that there is no registration nor has there been any application for registration to use vaccines of different types to complete a vaccination program. So, in Australia, there is no recognised or TGA approved process to administer vaccines of different types. The accepted methodology under the TGA approvals is that you receive either AstraZeneca, with two doses at the supported interval, or two doses of Pfizer at the supported interval, and, once Moderna comes onto the market, that will be recognised in a similar way. But, to be recognised as a full vaccination in Australia, it has to be done in accordance with the approval process established by the TGA, and there has been neither an application to recognise vaccinations of different types to complete a vaccination nor an approval to do so. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Griff, a supplementary question? 14:25 Senator GRIFF 76760 South Australia [by video link] Minister, there are instances where doctors have switched vaccine types due to a significant reaction to the first vaccine. Indeed, ATAGI actually advises it in that particular instance. Are you saying that this should not be permitted, or is not currently permitted, and that the individual must get an unnecessary third dose, to which a vaccine reaction is a potential risk to their health? 14:26 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] Thanks, Senator Griff. I think, for proper completeness, I should take the detail of your question on notice. I'm very happy to bring back specifics to you and to the chamber. But, as I have said to you at this point, there is no approval for cross-utilisation of vaccines in Australia. For that to occur, there would have to be an application by one of the companies to do so and an approval by the TGA for that to occur. Neither of those circumstances has, at this point in time, occurred. I'm happy to take the question on notice, and, if necessary, I can organise a briefing between Senator Griff, the TGA and the department to give him more detail. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Griff, a final supplementary question? 14:27 Senator GRIFF 76760 South Australia [by video link] Thank you, Minister, for undertaking to do that. I look forward to further advice from you. The government has announced it's setting aside a portion of the Moderna vaccine for a booster program, but, the numbers your government has advised to date won't be enough to cover the eligible population. What else is the government doing to ensure Australia will have sufficient booster vaccines available, and—you might like to take this on notice—does the department have a problem with mixing booster vaccine types? 14:27 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] It's not a matter of what the department has an issue with; it's a matter of what is approved through the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which approves the use of vaccines in this country. That process is supported by the data that goes along with the registration process. As the government has indicated, some of the Moderna doses have been set aside for possible use as boosters. I'm aware, the government is aware, that other vaccine companies are also working on variants of their vaccine for use, potentially, as booster doses, and some of the orders that we have in hand could be utilised for that purpose. As we have done all along, and as the virus has changed, we have continued to change our approach to meet the requirements of the vaccine rollout. (Time expired) Disability Services 46 14:28 Senator HUGHES 273828 New South Wales My question is to the Minister for Families and Social Services, Senator Ruston. Can the minister please advise the Senate how the Liberal-National government is helping people with a disability access support services and ensuring that they can receive up-to-date advice as we continue to navigate the COVID-19 pandemic? 14:29 Senator RUSTON 243273 South Australia I thank Senator Hughes for her question on this really important issue. We know that timely information and support are absolutely essential for Australians who live with disability, but never more so than they are now, as we navigate the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. The disability community is particularly diverse, and finding information about policies and programs and supports that are available for individuals can be quite a challenge. A lack of access to this information can also be a barrier to people being able to access the community and independence and their participation. We recognise this. In response, the Morrison-Joyce government has invested in the National Disability Gateway. We've worked extensively with people with disability and the disability sector to design a fit-for-purpose tool to make sure that Australians who live with disability have easy access to information and referral services. Importantly, we've relied on the advice of people in the field: those with lived experience of disability and those who care and advocate for them. The gateway will assist people with disability, and their families and carers, to use this trusted information through a website, a 1800 number and social media channels. It's a tool with information and advice on support from programs that range from education and health to housing and transport. It will be the central starting point for people with disability to be able to access the information and services that they need. It's fast and easy to use and it offers a range of accessible features—for example, an easy-read toggle on every single page of the website. Whether it be locating advocacy services, finding a sporting team to become involved with or identifying a local disability related event, the tool is there to assist everyone. Importantly, the gateway is for all Australians with disability, regardless of who they are or where they live. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Hughes, a supplementary question? 14:31 Senator HUGHES 273828 New South Wales Can the minister update the Senate on how the government is ensuring that the disability community is aware of this service? 14:31 Senator RUSTON 243273 South Australia Currently there is a national campaign being rolled out across the screens to encourage Australians with disability, and their families and carers, to interact with the new gateway. The tagline of the national campaign is 'I can.' What's so great about the campaign is that the ads are presented by people with disability. They represent the range of different disabilities, both visible and invisible, demonstrating that there is a huge diversity of different people in the disability community. Importantly, they know, from their own from experience, what a trusted service is all about; they understand what it is that they need and will genuinely understand what will make a difference to their lives. The campaign's run across a whole heap of media—radio, print advertisements and social media—and, throughout the Paralympics, we'll be running a TV campaign as well. Already we've seen a huge increase in the number of hits on the gateway as a result of this campaign. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Hughes, a final supplementary question? 14:32 Senator HUGHES 273828 New South Wales How does the Disability Gateway support the new National Disability Strategy? 14:32 Senator RUSTON 243273 South Australia Our government's absolutely committed to the National Disability Gateway, in response to the collective views of the disability community, who said that information about programs and services was often difficult to find and equally difficult to navigate. The gateway forms part of the government's investment in the new National Disability Strategy, where all governments—Commonwealth, state and territory—have committed to a national approach to building inclusion for all Australians who live with disability. There are an estimated 4.4 million people with disability across Australia, all with diverse and varying needs, and the gateway is designed to reach all of them, their families and the wider community. The website and the phone line are a central starting point to help people with disability, their carers, friends and family access services in their particular area and will help drive real improvements in their lives. The national campaign has also been designed to make sure that access is available to everyone. Indigenous Australians 47 14:33 Senator THORPE 280304 Victoria [by video link] My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. The current target for reducing overimprisonment of black kids by 30 per cent and adults by 15 per cent won't deliver parity between black and white on imprisonment rates until 2093. Is the government serious about not locking up black people before we die? We'll all be dead by 2093. 14:34 Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X South Australia I thank Senator Thorpe for her question and for her participation, along with that of many other senators, this morning in the statements acknowledging the Closing the Gap statement made and the implementation plan for the new approach to the targets in relation to the Closing the Gap program. I did reference, in my remarks in that debate this morning, some of the new targets in relation to justice within the Closing the Gap targets that have been developed alongside the Coalition of Peaks, state and territory governments and the Australian Local Government Association. Those targets that I referenced, which you have quoted, Senator Thorpe, are targets set out through until 2030 for reduction in the proportion of Indigenous Australians incarcerated. It should not be extrapolated that the reductions sought through to 2030 would be a linear rate of reduction into the future. It would absolutely be the government's hope—as I'm sure it is the hope of every state and territory government, as I am confident it is the hope of the Coalition of Peaks, and as I know from your question, Senator Thorpe, it is your hope—that we could and should strive to do even better than those targets to 2030 and to see the rate of reduction and equivalence in relation to incarceration rates achieved at a much faster rate beyond 2030 than can be achieved within that next eight-year period. We're serious about the investment in the programs there. We're serious about the fact that setting targets at a state and territory level as well enables them to be held to account. The reporting mechanisms enable everyone to focus on what is working to drive those rates down even further in the future. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Thorpe, a supplementary question? 14:36 Senator THORPE 280304 Victoria Minister, your Minister for Indigenous Australians has said that a 2093 parity date on the imprisonment of our people will hinder progress. You say you are co-designing with blackfellas. Why didn't you listen to those blackfellas that asked you to increase the justice targets? 14:37 Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X South Australia As I said in response to the primary question, we don't accept the idea that the target for parity in any way sits that far into the future. What we have outlined is the target for 2030 and the reduction rates that we seek to achieve by 2030. It is very important that the Justice Policy Partnership, with some $7.6 million of funding; the work in relation to preventing harm in Australian prisons and other places of detention; and other funding in relation to support for criminal justice reform and particularly the work of coronial inquiries; as well as family dispute resolution mechanisms—all measures that we have invested in following consultation and engagement with communities—are about making sure we drive those rates down towards parity. We would all wish that it could be done faster and we will be striving to exceed those targets. As I said, we certainly expect to see the rates of reduction increase beyond 2030 as a result of that focus on evidence based policy. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Thorpe, a final supplementary question? 14:38 Senator THORPE 280304 Victoria We've only been waiting over 200 years, so what's the hurry? Our people, who have been managing our own affairs for thousands of years, must be in charge of our own destiny. Minister, will your government support a treaty, the very thing that our people have been marching for and fighting for for decades? Will the Morrison government support a treaty? 14:38 Senator BIRMINGHAM H6X South Australia It is not the policy of our government to implement a treaty, but it certainly is the policy of our government to work as closely as possible, recognising the crucial role of the co-design principles that the Minister for Indigenous Australians, Mr Wyatt, brought to this approach around closing the gap and this new approach in terms of having designed those targets in conjunction with the Coalition of Peaks, seeking to engage Indigenous Australians at every step of that design approach and seeking to engage in relation to the implementation plan and the priorities—the more than $1 billion of new measures there. Crucially, having the states and territories setting their own targets as well—on which they will be held to account and on which there are review mechanisms in place—enables us not just to see a national picture but also to ensure all levels of government are working towards achieving the improved outcomes that we seek. Aged Care 48 14:39 Senator PATRICK 144292 South Australia My question is for the Minister for Aged Care and Senior Australians, Senator Colbeck. One of the three aged-care facilities in Whyalla operated by Kindred Living, the Annie Lockwood Court hostel, will close. The announcement came at short notice and the facility will close on 27 August. That is 16 days away. That will leave, as I understand it, at least 20 residents either living outside of Whyalla or stranded. Can the minister provide the chamber with an understanding of what the situation is with the Annie Lockwood Court hostel? 14:40 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] I thank Senator Patrick for the advice on the topic of his question. As Senator Patrick has indicated, the operators of Annie Lockwood House in Whyalla have indicated that they intend to close the facility and they have set a closing date of 26 August. The government has been working closely with the operators of Annie Lockwood Court, Kindred Living, in Whyalla for a considerable period. Senator Patrick would recollect the issues that came to light last year with respect to the care of residents within Annie Lockwood Court. A notice to agree was applied to the facility at that point in time, and that notice to agree remains in place. We have dedicated staff who work exclusively with the facility, and the facility has dedicated staff appointed to work with the residents and their families to provide suitable alternative accommodation. Kindred Living are aware of their responsibilities to maintain care for the residents. So it's not necessarily a matter of the facility closing on 26 August. Kindred Living are required under the act to support residents and identify alternative suitable accommodation or continue to care for them. I've been working alongside the South Australian government to ensure that there is capacity for the service to provide care— (Time expired) The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Patrick, a supplementary question? 14:42 Senator PATRICK 144292 South Australia Minister, I'd like to know what options the government is considering in relation to Annie Lockwood Court to ensure that the facility, for example, remains open or the residents remain in Whyalla. Other options are a COVID surge for staff and those sorts of things. What has been considered? What are the potential remedies? 14:43 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] The decision to retain the facility as an operated facility is one for the provider, Kindred Living. But what the government has done to support them is provide additional workforce capacity in circumstances where they haven't been able to maintain that themselves. We've been working with the South Australian government to look at what strategies there are to support residents in the short term and to ensure capacity and supply of aged-care services in the medium term. We've provided a surge workforce to the facility so they can maintain the capacity they're looking for. There will be a weekly meeting between the federal Department of Health, the state department of health and Kindred Living to continue to work through the options for both the short-term and the medium- to long-term provision of services in Whyalla. (Time expired) The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Patrick, a final supplementary question? 14:44 Senator PATRICK 144292 South Australia Minister, there have been reports of difficulties with the finances across the three facilities and, indeed, sanctions applied to the facilities. Will the government consider exercising its powers under section 63J to revoke the provider's approval and have others potentially take over the facilities or indeed the Commonwealth take over the facilities, even if that might be just for the short term? 14:44 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] Senator Patrick is correct that there has been regulatory action taken against the service, because the government's first priority is to ensure the quality of care for residents within the service. We are not contemplating taking over the service. We've had conversations with the South Australian government, as I've indicated, with respect to what the options might be there. I'm aware that there are discussions between Kindred Living and another party with respect to the possible sale of the service. We continue to work with Kindred Living and, where possible, we will support those processes to ensure that there is appropriate capacity for the delivery of aged-care services within Whyalla. We want people to be able to age in the communities where they live, so we're discussing with the South Australian government and Kindred Living the options to ensure that that can be the case. COVID-19: Child Care 49 14:45 Senator AYRES 16913 New South Wales [by video link] My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Youth, Senator Reynolds. Trent from Carlton in Sydney has been told by his childcare centre that they have been forced to continue charging all parents during the lockdown, regardless of whether their children are attending, because they've received no financial assistance from the Morrison government. Trent has said, 'It's absolutely disgusting.' Why is the Morrison government refusing to provide support for childcare centres in Sydney? 14:46 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia I thank Senator Ayres for that question. I completely refute the premise of the question. This government is doing all it can to back families and the childcare sector again during this pandemic and has acted swiftly to ensure appropriate mechanisms are in place. For example, for families, we are allowing services to waive out-of-pocket costs and have extended the number of days families are allowed to keep children absent before they lose access to the childcare subsidy; for childcare businesses, the Commonwealth has partnered with the New South Wales government to facilitate swift support through JobSaver to help businesses meet payroll costs if they've experienced a 30 per cent decline in revenue; and for childcare workers—a critical workforce in our economy, which I know all of us in this place acknowledge—where a worker has had their hours reduced they are eligible to apply for the COVID disaster payment of up to $750 a week. Importantly, in Greater Sydney, child care remains fully open and available to families, but we know that some families are choosing not to use care, including because of changes in their work patterns. From 19 July, services in Greater Sydney are allowed to waive the parents' component of the childcare fee when children are not attending. This provides a twofold benefit. Firstly, families benefit from the reduction in out-of-pocket costs if they are not using child care. For example, a family on $110,000 a year using three days a week of care for two children would save $178 a week during this difficult time. Secondly, to further support families in this situation, we are also providing additional allowable absences for the duration of the lockdown period—currently until 28 August this year. This mechanism means that families can keep children away from child care without losing their entitlement to the subsidy because of those absences. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Ayres, a supplementary question? 14:48 Senator AYRES 16913 New South Wales [by video link] One Sydney childcare provider struggling to stay afloat through the lockdown was told by the department of education to just stand down staff to save money. Is this the official position of the Morrison government? 14:48 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia Again I thank you for the question. Of course not. What a ridiculous question! This government has done everything it can—last year and this year—to provide support to Australian workers. Nearly $2 billion has been paid to a million Australians subject to current lockdowns. This government is doing everything it can in the best possible way to support Australian workers. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Ayres, a final supplementary question? 14:49 Senator AYRES 16913 New South Wales [by video link] The Morrison government has ignored pleas for support from childcare workers in the middle of a lockdown. As late as last week it was hounding families in Sydney's lockdown—who had received the historic childcare subsidy—for debts into the thousands. Who is responsible for this decision to pursue these families struggling in the Prime Minister's lockdown in Sydney? 14:49 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia Again, I utterly reject the premise of the question. It is completely and utterly false. As I said in my primary answer, we are doing everything we can for impacted families with children in child care, for the childcare centres themselves and for the workers. The PRESIDENT I0Q Order, Senator Reynolds. I have Senator Wong on a point of order. Senator Wong 00AOU It's a point of order on direct relevance. The last supplementary actually went to responsibility for the decision to pursue families in Sydney for debts related to the childcare subsidy. The PRESIDENT I0Q Unless I misheard, I did hear the minister disagree with that assertion. I will listen carefully, but I take at face value what I hear, and I think that answer is directly relevant. Senator REYNOLDS 250216 As I have said, I utterly reject the premise of the question. If there are any families receiving benefits who are doing it tough, they can always contact my agency, Services Australia, to seek relief and support. There are many measures available for families in that circumstance, and, as I said in response to the primary question, we are doing absolutely everything we can to help families, to help workers and to help businesses, in conjunction with the New South Wales government. Higher Education 50 14:51 Senator McGRATH 217241 Queensland My question is to the Minister for Regionalisation, Regional Communications and Regional Education, Senator McKenzie. Can the minister advise the Senate how the Liberal-National government is working to improve the disparity between city and country students as highlighted in the national regional, rural and remote higher education strategy? 14:51 Senator McKENZIE 207825 Victoria I thank Senator McGrath for his question. As someone who grew up in regional Queensland, he knows the challenges. I'm sure that's why he continues to support the Isolated Children's Parents Association, who recently celebrated 50 years of advocacy for access to education for people who live, work and invest in rural and regional Australia. The Liberal-National government know the challenges faced by regional families trying to ensure that their children receive a quality education. We know, for example, that many rural families with children at both government and private boarding schools are struggling with the impact of state border closures and quarantine arrangements as a result of the latest COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. As the newly appointed minister for regional education, I've called an urgent meeting this Friday to hear directly from parent groups and state border commissioners on how we can work together with states and territories on commonsense solutions. There is more to do. The Liberal-National government are getting on with the job, and that's why we're committed to improving education access and quality for all Australians, no matter where they live. Since 2016, our government has invested more than $1 billion to improve high-level tertiary education outcomes and opportunities for regional and remote Australians—more than any Labor government. Labor like to champion their record in education, but, it seems, that's only if you live in capital cities. Part of this $1 billion investment includes more than $400 million in regional measures to support the Napthine review. The measures seek to address the disparity that has consistently existed between city and country students and provide additional investment to boost regional development and student aspiration. We know that regional students are twice as likely as metropolitan students to move to study and that they have lower education attainment rates, which is why we have a raft of financial support measures to assist them. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator McGrath, a supplementary question? 14:53 Senator McGRATH 217241 Queensland How is the government helping students in rural Australia to stay in their local regions and access higher education? 14:54 Senator McKENZIE 207825 Victoria The Liberal and National government understands that not all students can or want to move away to study. The Nationals in government know that many regional students want to stay local to access higher education. That is why the $74 million Regional University Centres program includes funding for additional Commonwealth supported places locally. We know that if students are educated in the regions they're much more likely to stay in the regions. The centres provide student support services, pastoral care, study advice, support to develop writing and research skills, and essential infrastructure such as study spaces, video conferencing, computers and high-speed internet access. Importantly, they're community operated to respond to the specific needs of the community, like the ones in your home state, Senator McGrath, in Goondiwindi, Roma, St George and Dirranbandi. In 2021 the program is supporting more than 1,900 students to access higher education. (Time expired) The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator McGrath, a final supplementary question? 14:55 Senator McGRATH 217241 Queensland How is the government supporting students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and regional areas to reach their full potential through further educational pathways? 14:55 Senator McKENZIE 207825 Victoria Thank you for another great question, Senator McGrath. It's our government that is supporting low SES students access higher education—and we're very, very proud to do it. The Napthine review identified that rural, regional and remote students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds often face cumulative challenges that can make it difficult to access and complete their higher education. Data shows that these students have lower participation rates than those from major cities. Consequently, students from these backgrounds require additional, focused and tailored support to help them thrive in tertiary education. That's why our government funds the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program, which plays a significant role in supporting public universities to implement strategies to improve attainment and retention outcomes, targeted at those from low-SES backgrounds and rural and regional areas. It is one of five measures that forms the new Indigenous Regional Low SES Attainment Fund that broadens those existing programs. Geography should never be a determinant for your education— (Time expired) COVID-19 51 14:56 Senator GALLAGHER ING Australian Capital Territory My question is for the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Aged Care, Senator Colbeck. Today 344 new cases have been reported in New South Wales, with 62 people currently in ICU and, tragically, 34 total deaths from COVID-19 during the current outbreak. The Prime Minister has said that COVID will be 'like the flu' and that we should 'treat it like the flu'. Does Mr Morrison stand by this statement? 14:57 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania [by video link] Senator Gallagher and members of the Labor Party have a very unfortunate habit of misrepresenting what people say in the chamber. In the future, with a full vaccination program and other measures to appropriately manage the COVID-19 pandemic, it may very well be that we get to the stage where we are able to live with COVID-19 in that way. But I don't believe that we should be verballed by misrepresentations from the Labor Party with respect to their questions in this place. We have, all through this pandemic, worked to ensure the safety of Australians. We set in place a plan very early to support Australians. We closed the borders early. We set in place plans to protect Australians. We've put in place a vaccination program that continues to roll out and grow at pace. We will continue to do that, but we won't put up with negative misrepresentations and undermining of the protection of Australians by the Labor party. We will continue to work in the Australian community's interests. We know, because Mr Albanese said, that he's only interested in fighting the government. Well, we're fighting the virus. That's what we will continue to do. We will continue to work in support of the Australian people against the pandemic. The Labor Party can fight whoever they please, but our focus is the Australian people. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Gallagher, supplementary question? 14:59 Senator GALLAGHER ING Australian Capital Territory We have the quote from the Prime Minister, so we reject the assertion that it's misrepresentation. My supplementary is: What health advice is Mr Morrison relying on when he says that COVID will be 'like the flu' and that we should 'treat it like the flu'? 14:59 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania Again, my view is that Mr Morrison's comments are being misrepresented by the Labor Party, as so many comments by members of the government are misrepresented by the Labor Party, who, as I said, are only interested in fighting us— Opposition senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT I0Q Order! I have Senator Gallagher on point of order. Senator Gallagher ING Point of order is on direct relevance. The question was around what health advice has informed the comments, not the comments themselves. The PRESIDENT I0Q I can't instruct the minister as to how he must address a question. The minister is in order, because he is challenging the premise of the question. That can be debated after question time, but I don't believe he's not being relevant by addressing it in this fashion. Senator Colbeck. Senator COLBECK 00AOL I do believe that the Prime Minister's comments are being taken out of context deliberately by the Labor Party, which they so often do— The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Wong, on a point of order? Senator Wong 00AOU Mr President, it is not directly relevant, in my submission, to simply continue to cast aspersions on motivations. I accept in this place there is robust debate and what I think you describe as 'glancing references'. Senator Gallagher has asked a question about the health advice grounding the Prime Minister's statement made on 2 July. If the minister were to return to that, I think that would be consistent with the standing orders. The PRESIDENT I0Q I've allowed you to restate the question; however, in my view, I don't believe the minister is assigning a motive. He's making a claim about a quote being misrepresented. I don't believe that goes as far as impugning the motive of another senator. It can be a disagreement about its context or its meaning. The minister is entitled to address that, in my view, because there was a specific quotation. Otherwise, I would be called into instructing ministers as to how to answer questions, which is not appropriate. Senator Colbeck. Senator COLBECK 00AOL I do not accept the premise of the question. And taking a quote out of context and then applying a request for health advice to something clearly taken out of context, quite frankly, is a continuation of the dishonesty of the Labor Party in this whole debate. So I will reject the premise of the question and completely reject the assertion by the opposition in the context of the comments that are being applied. The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator Gallagher, a final supplementary question? 15:01 Senator GALLAGHER ING Australian Capital Territory Mr Morrison has declared COVID would be like the flu, failed to ensure sufficient vaccine supplies and argued against lockdowns. Will he now take responsibility for the disaster unfolding in Sydney? 15:02 Senator COLBECK 00AOL Tasmania I thank Senator Gallagher for the question. The Prime Minister continues to provide strong leadership to this nation in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Whether that be from the early circumstance of closing the borders, whether that be from developing the national plan for COVID, whether that be seeking the advice from the Doherty institute for a plan out of lockdowns— Senator O'Neill interjecting— The PRESIDENT I0Q Senator O'Neill, order! If I ask senators to come to order, I'm going to go back to my rule to ask them to count to 10 slowly before they start breaking the rules again. I appreciate there are strong passions on this matter. Senator Colbeck. Senator COLBECK 00AOL We will continue to provide strong leadership as a government as we manage the pandemic, and we won't accept the relentless negativity of the Labor Party as they seek to fight us rather than help us fight the pandemic. Senator Birmingham H6X I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS 52 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS COVID-19: Morrison Government, COVID-19: New South Wales 52 15:03 Senator O'NEILL 140651 New South Wales (): I move: 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 COVID-19 outbreak in New South Wales. As a senator for the great state of New South Wales, I say to the people: do not let this Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, who in cahoots with Gladys Berejiklian, the Premier of New South Wales, delivered the lockdown that we are all suffering— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT 10000 Senator Canavan, on a point of order? Senator Canavan 245212 I rise on a small point of order: I think Senator O'Neill's mic was off during the beginning of her contribution. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT 10000 Would you start again, please, Senator O'Neill? Senator O'NEILL 140651 I'm more than happy to start again, but the whole beginning of my contribution was interrupted by people who just don't care and will just play their game of words while, literally, New South Wales is in a lockdown such as has never been seen in the history of this country. As a senator for New South Wales, I am so disgusted with what's going on in my home state. Three hundred and forty-four cases were reported just today, with 62 in ICU. There have been 34 deaths. I want to formally commence with my acknowledgement of the civic leadership shown by Mr Khalil Ibrahim and his family by coming forward, in the depth of their grief at the loss of their mother and father, Kaoukab and Hachem, and going on the record to deliver a health literacy message and some hope to the people of New South Wales—telling the truth about what's going on, because you're not going to get the truth from the government in this place. They don't know how to tell it straight any day of the week. To Khalil and his family: I send you my condolences on your great loss. I am standing up here for our community because this government is incapable of standing up. They are incoherent in their messaging. Even the best Australians trying to do the right thing cannot get access to the very vaccines that they need to protect them. In fact, in this poor family, Kaoukab and Hachem were waiting. To make it worse, the family discovered that Hachem and Kaoukab were waiting in the backlog to get their vaccination. That is a fact. That is the fact that's facing many of the 62 who are in ICU because they couldn't get a vaccination. How many of the 344 who were announced today as the latest people in New South Wales with COVID couldn't get a vaccination? Thirty-four people have died in just this outbreak alone, and it's because the government didn't do its job. There's the incoherent messaging, perhaps very succinctly outlined in the cartoon by Golding: a picture of synchronised swimming, described as 'synchronised spinning', with the Prime Minister. It has an image of the Prime Minister with his hand raised and saying, 'We're at the front of the queue,' and in the second image he says, 'We're at the back of the queue.' In the next image, he says, 'It's not a race,' and in the following image he says, 'Okay, it is a race.' Then he says, 'I'm confident NSW can get it done without shutting down,' before saying, 'Shutting down is the only way.' That kind of spinning is exactly what we see in this chamber day after day, while New South Wales is confronting the horror of a COVID outbreak that was entirely preventable if the proper advice had been followed. Instead, we saw the Bondi let-off, we saw the gold standard pumped up by the Prime Minister, and now everyone in New South Wales is failing. We have doctors in New South Wales telling it like it is, giving warnings that need to be heeded, but not just by the people of New South Wales who are lining up trying to get vaccines and can't get them because this government failed to buy them when they were required. On the record from an experienced respiratory specialist is the claim that New South Wales is suffering from not just the disease and the lack of vaccines but also a failure of leadership. It's the confusing messaging. In New South Wales, I talk to my family. I FaceTime with them because I can't be with them; we're all locked away from one another. We can't get clarity on the message. Is the current strategy to lock down and eliminate COVID or are we trying to vaccinate our way out of it? The people in New South Wales have no sense of the real direction of this government, and the cost is lives. I want to close my contribution by saying politics does matter. The decisions of this government are having a real and significant impact on the lives of people. I particularly want to thank the heroes of this pandemic—scientists, doctors, nurses, those in aged care, disability workers, cleaners and other essential workers—who are out there doing their best and telling the truth, not spinning it every day and failing to stand up and lead in the way that this government is now absolutely known for. (Time expired) 15:09 Senator CANAVAN 245212 Queensland I too want to start my remarks by paying condolences to Khalil's family, which Senator O'Neill mentioned. It is a personal tragedy for so many families through this pandemic when lives are lost. Hundreds of Australians' lives have been lost through what is a terrible pandemic. Before I get to the issues that Senator O'Neill raised, it is always very important for us to reflect about why we're suffering through this pandemic, and we must always remember that the reason this is happening—the reason four million people have died around the world—is the gross cover-up of the Chinese Communist Party. They are to blame for this and they deserve condemnation constantly for their lack of ability to be upfront with the world about this virus. Whether or not it came from the lab, which is an open question, they certainly should be condemned for their cover-up of what they knew was going on and what has been unleashed on the world. Given what was unleashed on the world, this government has been upfront that not everything has gone right, that not every decision, in hindsight, is what we would have chosen to do, and we have accepted that. We understand that. But, on any measure, this country has managed this pandemic as well as, if not better than, almost every other country in the world. Most importantly, of course, people have been largely kept alive more than in other countries. We have, largely, kept people safe, but we have not been able to stop every fatality. No government can guarantee that. Senator O'Neill spoke a lot about the past and, as I say, there are legitimate criticisms to make of government decisions and responses, but I don't think there is any government in the world you can point to and say, 'That's perfect; they've done everything right.' At these sorts of times, that is an impossible goal to aim for. What we do need, and what would be better from the opposition here, is: What do we do in the future? What do we do going forward now? Here is where the opposition, in particular, is showing a distinct lack of leadership and a distinct lack of forthrightness with the Australian people, because they seem to be at least implying that somehow all we need to do is make the right decisions and everything will go away. We will have zero COVID and there will be no fatalities. They are putting forward a proposal for a dreamland that does not exist. Anyone in this place—anyone who thinks of themselves as a leader of this nation—who propagates such a myth is no leader, because they haven't got the guts to be upfront with the Australian people about the challenges we face and how we are going to respond to those challenges in the months to years ahead. It is almost certain, as Professor Shine rightly said today in the Australian Financial Review, that the coronavirus, unfortunately—coming from the Chinese Communist Party or thanks to the Chinese Communist Party—will be with us forever. It will be somewhere around the world forever. So what's the plan to deal with that? What is the plan? We cannot lock down forever. We cannot impose these massive, cruel costs on the poorest in our society forever. Like Senator O'Neill, I recognise the tireless efforts of our frontline health workers, but we should also recognise the efforts of poorer people in society who have had their incomes taken away from them and their livelihoods stripped. Their ability to see and congregate with their family members, including dying relatives, has been restricted by our responses to this crisis. Those things have to be considered as well, and we have to come to a point where we make mature decisions as a nation in responding to threats as severe as this one that is facing us. If we fail to do that, we will divide our community and we will never get to a conclusion where we can move forward into some sort of manageable way of dealing with this virus from the Chinese Communist Party. But, if we continue to propagate false hope, we will not be able to show leadership to the Australian people, we won't be able to take them with us and it will lead to much, much worse outcomes from the coronavirus over the long term. 15:14 Senator AYRES 16913 New South Wales [by video link] Senator Canavan ought to hang his head in shame. He talks about division and creating division in the community. I can't think of too many people who have gone to greater effort than Senator Canavan to propagate misinformation, to undermine the public health message and to send out conspiracy theories. He, Senator Rennick and the member for Dawson—all of them out there on the coalition backbench—are undermining public health messages, making it tough for the health authorities, creating doubt in people's minds about whether the virus exists or whether the lockdown measures are appropriate, and creating doubts about vaccines. Senator Canavan ought not to come in here unless he apologises for the damage that he has done to the national interest. The role of the National Party in this has been appalling. In March, the then Minister for Regional Health, Regional Communications and Local Government told the other place: Regional Australia has been probably the safest place on the planet … He went on to say: … this rollout is about demography, not geography. So when your age group or particular group is ready to be vaccinated, the rollout in regional Australia is exactly the same as it is in the cities. The Deputy Prime Minister told the Insiders program, when asked a few weeks ago how the rollout was going out in regional Australia, 'It's going very well.' Well, nothing could be further from the truth. This has been a story of complacency from the National Party and of undermining the public health messages. What have we got now? Dubbo, Armidale, Tamworth, the Northern Rivers and the Hunter all in lockdown. All of these are regions with vaccination rates well below the national average. While there was a chance to vaccinate regional New South Wales, the National Party were entirely focused on themselves. The Deputy Prime Minister was too busy doing the numbers in Canberra to address the rollout failures in his own electorate, where the vaccination numbers are catastrophically low. He even replaced the minister responsible for the vaccine rollout in regional Australia, not because of his failure in standing up for regional communities and delivering vaccines but because he voted the wrong way. Then there's the Nationals member for Dawson, who's using his privileged role in this parliament to actively spread disinformation about COVID-19, without any rebuke from the Prime Minister or the Deputy Prime Minister and egged on by extremists like Senator Canavan and Senator Rennick. Senator Canavan himself published an op-ed full of half-baked calculations which would embarrass his former employer at the Productivity Commission. He said that the public health measures were too expensive. He's since tweeted: Yes Delta is more transmissible but it is less deadly so we don't need to lockdown. End the lockdowns! Well, you can be sure of one thing: Senator Canavan will never have to attend a hospital bed and intubate a seriously ill patient. He will never have to clean a patient who is in a coma. He will never have to talk to the grieving relatives of a patient with COVID-19 who has died. He will continue to just propagate his keyboard warrior theories and promote disinformation and division within the Australian community, and he ought to be ashamed of himself. The result of all of this division and all of this complacency is more lockdowns extending their reach into regional Australia, where the health outcomes have always been worse. The result of the 'no lockdown' approach of Senator Canavan would be regional hospitals overwhelmed, more deaths and more disabilities. He is a propagator of a COVID-19 death cult. He ought to stop, the member for Dawson ought to stop, Senator Rennick ought to stop and the Prime Minister should actually have the courage to stand up to them, to rebuke them publicly and to send out, for once, a clear and coherent public health message and do the job that this Prime Minister's supposed to have done: deliver vaccines for Australia. (Time expired) 15:19 Senator PATERSON 144138 Victoria It's my honour to serve the Senate, and through it my constituents, as the deputy chair of the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19. Thinking back to a year ago, when that committee was established in the early stages of the pandemic, I remember quite well the bipartisan spirit in which it was established. The committee was proposed through this chamber on a unanimous basis, and its early work in particular, led by Senator Gallagher, was admirably bipartisan. Unfortunately I think what's happened over time is that pressure has been brought to bear on that committee and on Labor MPs and senators to walk away from the bipartisan spirit by which the early response to COVID-19 was characterised and to seek to make partisan opportunities from the pandemic. I was listening very carefully to the contributions of Senator O'Neill and Senator Ayres, and I have a lot of empathy for them—as New South Wales senators—for what they, their families and their constituents are going through. But in listening to their contributions I couldn't decide whether their memories are just short—so short that they are as short as the memory of a goldfish—or just selective. In Senator O'Neill's contribution she said the lockdown in New South Wales is something that has never before been seen in the history of this country. Well, Senator O'Neill, when the restrictions lift in New South Wales, as I hope they soon do—when the border closures soon come to an end—I encourage you to come to Melbourne and try to tell Victorians that the lockdown New South Wales underwent has never before been seen in the history of this country. I think you might be interested by the response you get, because of course Victorians remember the very long 111-day lockdown they endured. I hope New South Wales does not have to suffer what Victorians suffered. Labor senators, throughout question time, talked about the 34 very tragic deaths that have occurred so far in the outbreak in New South Wales. Indeed they are tragic, and indeed that is 34 deaths more than any Australian would like to see. Unfortunately, it makes me recall the more than 800 deaths that occurred in Victoria last year in our lockdown. Sadly, we have been here before. Senator Ayres, in his contribution, talked about the misinformation that had been contributed in this debate yet, curiously, omitted from his attacks on some others in this place any criticism of his own colleagues in the way in which they've contributed to misinformation in this debate. He could have talked about the misinformation his own leader, Mr Albanese, has fuelled, particularly the scepticism around the AstraZeneca vaccine and the way in which Mr Albanese has not been able to bring himself to endorse what we know is a safe and effective vaccine, approved by our Therapeutic Goods Administration. He could have thought about his own New South Wales colleague Mr Husic, the shadow minister, who, in his own instance of misinformation a few weeks ago, said Australia does not have any sovereign domestic vaccine manufacturing capability. I hope it was just an error and not an outright lie. Either way, it was a case of misinformation. He could have thought about the Labor Party's hand-picked candidate in Higgins, who, on her social media pages like Twitter and in an episode of Q&A has baselessly undermined the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca vaccine in a way that is very dangerous, given the millions of doses of that vaccine and the domestic manufacturing capacity of that vaccine that we have. We know from the modelling released by the Peter Doherty Institute just a few weeks ago that there is a statistically insignificant difference in efficacy between the AstraZeneca vaccine and the Pfizer vaccine. Yet we've seen, repeatedly, significant hesitation in our community to take the AstraZeneca vaccine because of the way in which it's been undermined. They could have instead taken the route of some of their more responsible colleagues. I pay tribute to the member for Maribyrnong, Mr Shorten, who visited the AstraZeneca facility in Melbourne, the CSL facility, and congratulated the workers for the amazing work they're doing producing an Australian-made vaccine for this virus. Senator Ciccone in this place has equally promoted AstraZeneca and encouraged his constituents to take it up, and Mr Bowen in the other place has encouraged them to take it up. Finally, though, I have to say that I was surprised by my friend Senator Gallagher's question, the final question in question time today. It seems to me that she's not familiar with the road map agreed to by the national cabinet—by all state premiers and the Prime Minister—the final phase of which is that, when we hopefully get to those higher rates of vaccination: manage COVID-19 as an infectious disease like any other in the community. That's the world that all Australians aspire to. That's the world that we should be striving to. And we should do so on a bipartisan basis. (Time expired) 15:24 Senator SHELDON 168275 New South Wales I rise to make comment on this motion of Senator O'Neill to take note of Senator Birmingham's responses to questions. Here in New South Wales today, we've seen another 344 new COVID-19 cases. There are currently 374 people in hospital and 62 people in intensive care. There have been 34 deaths, which means that actually our hearts should be going out to those who have lost their loved ones. But we have a defence from the government, in this taking note. The Nationals senator's defence, Trump-like, is that it was China's fault. So he doesn't want to hold anyone else to account. Then the senator who spoke before me said that we should not question the failings of the government. Well, it is our responsibility to question what the government is doing with this lockdown. It's critically important that a spotlight, as disinfectant, be put on what the government is doing and how the government is performing. It is in the national interest to ensure that we do get proper answers, unlike what we've been seeing through question time. We're nearly two months into lockdown here in Greater Sydney, and, unfortunately, we are seeing other parts of the state join in: the Hunter Valley, New England, Byron Shire, the Richmond Valley, Lismore, Ballina Shire and now Tamworth and Dubbo. Case numbers are continuing to head in the wrong direction. Yesterday, the Sydney Morning Herald published a powerful opinion piece from a Western Sydney doctor who is gravely concerned about the situation in western and south-western Sydney. The doctor said: NSW is almost certainly on the precipice of a massive deterioration. Contact tracers are overwhelmed, with reporting of infection hotspots lagging by days. The whole strategy of relying on contact tracing for infection control is failing, or indeed has failed. This very brave whistleblower has spoken out. We've got to be asking questions about where we're up to in the fight against COVID-19. This specialist from Western Sydney has also given us a stark warning on what the situation is on the ground here in Sydney. How did it come to this? There are some obvious failings. There's the botched vaccine rollout that Mr Morrison said isn't a race; there is the failure to set up a national quarantine system, which has seen a leak from hotel quarantine on average every nine days; there is the failure to supply vaccines to pharmacies, with just 25 per cent of authorised pharmacies now putting jabs into arms; there is the failure of the Morrison government to stop its own members of parliament from spreading outrageous misinformation. In the time I have left, I just want to go to one other brave whistleblower, from Sydney Airport, who has spoken about how the drivers and now the entire country were let down by lazy and negligent processes—particularly when we then turn to the poor limo driver, who has been singled out and ostracised for being Patient Zero in the latest outbreak. Passenger buses there are used to transport international arrivals to hotel quarantine. They are cleaned comprehensively by cleaners in full PPE between every single trip at the airport. That's best practice. The Australian Defence Force has been brought in to load luggage into these buses in a COVID-safe manner. That is best practice. But, for the international crew on passenger or freight flights, none of these systems are in place. The vehicles used to transport crew from the airport to the hotel are not cleaned. They're not cleaned at the airport. They are not cleaned between trips. If a crew member with COVID sits in one of these minivans, then every other crew member who sits in the vehicle for the rest of the day, or even days later, is stepping into a viral bomb. Not only does the Australian Defence Force not load bags into these vehicles, but the drivers are forced to do everything themselves—whilst these bags aren't being loaded appropriately by defence personnel—without PPE, except maybe a face mask. How is that happening? It's happening because of government inaction and incompetence. (Time expired) Question agreed to. Indigenous Australians 57 15:30 Senator SIEWERT e5z Western Australia On behalf of Senator Thorpe, I move: That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) to a question without notice asked by Senator Thorpe today relating to imprisonment rates for Indigenous Australians. 15:30 Senator THORPE 280304 Victoria [by video link] I rise to take note of the minister's answers to my questions on the Closing the Gap agreement. It's probably better to say that I rise to take note of the minister's failure to provide an answer. Every year, every time, the government stands up to apologise for its failures, promising to do better next time, and then fails again. There's no bigger proof of this government's failures and complete lack of ambition than the justice targets in the Closing the Gap report. The target to reduce overimprisonment of our young people by 30 per cent in 10 years and of our adults by 15 per cent in 10 years is a joke. It means that we won't achieve parity on imprisonment rates until 2093—yes, 2093. We need to see change in our lifetime, surely? Our communities urgently want stronger, more ambitious justice targets to end overimprisonment of our people. It's an urgent matter for us. I know it's not an urgent matter for you fellas in there, but we're dying waiting. We want ambitious targets, rather than the unacceptable proposal of achieving parity in 72 years. Going by our average lifetime, not even my 13-year-old daughter will see that. Strong, ambitious justice targets will save lives. In the 30 years since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, 500 of us have died at the hands of the criminal, racist legal system. Going by that indicator alone, we can expect well over 1,000 deaths in custody by 2093. So lots to look forward to, right? There's lots to be happy about as a blackfella in this country today! What the minister was saying in this chamber earlier is that the Morrison government is okay with that number: 'Let's have a shandy. Let's all go to our privileged places and feel good about that.' Well, we don't. We're dying on your watch. Our communities cannot mourn more deaths in custody. We must see changes in our lifetime. We demand it. We demand solutions to all of these problems that we did not create. Remember, we didn't create this. Blackfellas aren't the issue in this country. The government is the issue in this country, not us. We're not an issue. Don't call them 'black issues' or 'Indigenous issues'. We're not the issue. We need to be in the driver's seat. We need to determine our own destiny. We are hurt by the Morrison government imposing top-down policies like the mission managers did in the old days, making decisions for us and thinking that they know best. 'We'll steal the children, because they'll be better off in a white family.' We know what that's like. We're sick of that. We don't want to live like that no more. Our people have been managing our own affairs for thousands of years. We must be in charge of our destiny again. It's called self-determination. When decisions are in our hands, our solutions work and we take care of our communities. Blackfellas' culture is about caring for everyone. No-one will miss out. We modelled this in setting up the nation's first Aboriginal legal services and Aboriginal health services. My grandmother was part of setting up the first Aboriginal health service in Victoria in the late sixties. That's self-determination. And do you know why? It was because the white doctors and white services wouldn't even let us in the door to seek health care, so we had to do it ourselves. And it worked because it was community controlled and it was self-determined. We need a treaty. We need to sit down and negotiate how we can bring this nation forward. The only way we're going to truly mature as a nation and bring everybody together—Libs, Labs, everybody—is to negotiate a treaty. We're one of only a few Commonwealth countries in the world that don't have a treaty with their First Peoples. Come on! Let's move together, let's heal together and let's negotiate a treaty together. Let's negotiate the settlement of this country. It has never been settled and we have not ceded our sovereignty. Question agreed to. NOTICES 57 NOTICES Presentation 57 Withdrawal 59 15:35 Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS e4t New South Wales [by video link] Pursuant to notice given yesterday on behalf of the Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation, I withdraw business of the Senate notice of motion No. 2 for today proposing the disallowance of the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Rules 2020. CONDOLENCES 59 CONDOLENCES Beale, Mr Julian Howard 59 15:36 The PRESIDENT I0Q It is with deep regret that I inform the Senate of the death, on 3 August 2021, of Julian Howard Beale, a former member of the House of Representatives for the divisions of Deakin and Bruce in Victoria from 1984 to 1996. COMMITTEES 60 COMMITTEES Community Affairs Legislation Committee, Economics Legislation Committee 60 Reporting Date 60 15:36 The PRESIDENT I0Q I remind senators that the question may be put on any of those at the request of any senator. There being none, we will proceed to the discovery of formal business. DOCUMENTS 60 DOCUMENTS Industry Growth Centres 60 Order for the Production of Documents 60 15:37 Senator URQUHART 231199 Tasmania At the request of Senator Watt, I move: That— (1) The Senate notes that: (a) on 5 August 2021, the Senate resolved to request that there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology, by no later than 10 am on Monday, 9 August 2021, the ACIL Allen report on the Industry Growth Centres; and (b) this document has not been tabled, and the response of the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology does not represent a claim for public interest immunity in any respect. (2) The Senate requires the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology to table the document by 9.30 am on Thursday, 12 August 2021. (3) Should the document not be tabled, the Senate further resolves to require the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology to attend the Senate at 3 pm on Thursday, 12 August 2021 to explain why the document has not been tabled. (4) Any senator may move to take note of the explanation required by paragraph (3). (5) Any motion under paragraph (4) may be debated for no longer than 60 minutes, shall have precedence over all business until determined, and senators may speak to the motion for not more than 10 minutes each. The PRESIDENT I0Q The question is that motion No. 1211 be agreed to.

The Senate divided. [15:41]
(The President—Senator Ryan)

17 AYES Brown, CL Carr, KJ Chisholm, A Farrell, D Gallagher, KR Hanson-Young, SC Lambie, J Lines, S McKim, NJ O'Neill, D Patrick, RL Pratt, LC Siewert, R Urquhart, AE (teller) Waters, LJ Watt, M Whish-Wilson, PS 17 NOES Brockman, S Canavan, MJ Cash, MC Duniam, J Hume, J McGrath, J McKenzie, B McMahon, S O'Sullivan, MA Payne, MA Rennick, G Reynolds, L Roberts, M Ruston, A Ryan, SM Scarr, P Smith, DA (teller) 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

15:42 The PRESIDENT I0Q That concludes the discovery of formal business, but I remind senators that, at 4 pm, we will be returning to debate on the business of the Senate motions, which may result in divisions. It will interrupt the MPI. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 61 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Prime Minister 61 15:43 The PRESIDENT I0Q I inform the Senate that, at 8:30 am today, 14 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 O'Neill: Pursuant to Standing Order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion: The growing list of people Mr Morrison blames for his own failures: ATAGI, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, State and Territory Governments, vaccination clinics, and Australians themselves for his bungled COVID-19 vaccine rollout; and his own Ministers for his Government's misuse of taxpayer money. More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places— The PRESIDENT I0Q 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 clock accordingly. 15:43 Senator O'NEILL 140651 New South Wales I rise to speak today on a matter of great public importance, which you have just outlined in your opening statement. That is that there is, in fact, a growing list of people and institutes that Mr Morrison blames for his own failures. How on earth can we expect the leader of the nation to correct his mistakes if he can't even own them? We've seen Mr Morrison blame ATAGI, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, state and territory governments, vaccination clinics and even Australians themselves for what can only be described as a massively bungled COVID-19 vaccine rollout and his own ministers for the government's misuse of taxpayer funds in its response to that national crisis. The consequences of Mr Morrison's failures in this area have had a massive impact on my home state of New South Wales. More than half the population woke up this morning under lockdown. For most in New South Wales, it will now be their seventh week in lockdown and the numbers of cases are rising ever higher. I want to acknowledge the incredible efforts of the Victorians under the leadership of Mr Andrews, who was absolutely maligned by the Prime Minister at the time, in preventing the spread of illness and disease in the great state of Victoria. We are in a terrible position in New South Wales now, and sadly the numbers are increasing. This could have been avoided. All over the developed world, nations with successful vaccine rollouts are returning to life—a very, very different scenario from what we face here in Australia under the leadership of the Liberal-National party, Mr Morrison and his team. His team come in here and continue to back him up, back up his excuses and back up his contrasting reality speeches. Everything the man says is incoherent most of the time. The problem with vaccine rollouts being unable to happen is we can see a very different life for us here in Australia by comparison to overseas. We can see others across the world seeing concerts; their pubs are open and their economies are bouncing back. Why not in Australia? Why aren't we returning to normal life? Australia is not returning to the normal life that we all want, because Mr Morrison did not build a functioning quarantine system for overseas travel and he didn't secure a varied and sufficient supply of vaccine. It is as simple as that. Has the Prime Minister taken any responsibility for his decision-making and his failure of leadership for the Australian people? Of course not, because Mr Morrison continues to pretend that he is right every time he steps up to a microphone. That is why we are finding over time he is completely contradicting himself. First, Mr Morrison did not secure enough supply of Pfizer and Moderna because he put all the eggs in the AstraZeneca basket. It is important to note that that was the cheapest version of any sort of protection that we could get. Mr Morrison and Hunt botched the messaging regarding the extremely rare blood clot condition with AstraZeneca. That led to many people who actually still believed the Prime Minister at that stage making a decision to wait for Pfizer. 'Be careful about AstraZeneca'—that was the message coming out of the leadership of this country, and people decided that they would wait for Pfizer. Well, what a disaster waiting has been. What's happened? We've seen thousands of vials of perfectly good vaccine perish. Again, it's been a failure of leadership by Mr Morrison. I want to be very clear to anybody who might be listening to this: AstraZeneca can protect you from the virus. I have received it, my husband has received it and, despite the fact that all my children are in their 20s, I encouraged them to do their own research and each one of them has received their first jab of AstraZeneca. That's because they know that they can't rely on this government that botches everything at every turn to protect them. They had to take matters into their own hands. Government senators interjecting— Senator O'NEILL 140651 I'm not distressed by the noise that is coming from the other side of the chamber. In addition to Mr Morrison's denial of reality and his cacophony of excuses, we have the bleating of those opposite, who are backing him in at every turn and saying: 'He's a great Prime Minister. He's doing a good job.' It doesn't feel like that in New South Wales, let me tell you. It doesn't feel like that for businesses in New South Wales. AstraZeneca can protect you— Senator Hughes interjecting— Senator Duniam interjecting— Senator O'NEILL 140651 Who's playing the blame game? Do you really want to ask that question? Accept responsibility. Accept responsibility for the decisions of your government. AstraZeneca can protect you from the virus. AstraZeneca is the reason that 75 per cent of the UK is vaccinated, and they are returning to normal life as they knew it before the vaccines were rolled out there. The head of the TGA only yesterday said that AstraZeneca has saved dozens of lives every single day since the pandemic started. But Mr Morrison's comments, his embroidery, his profuse language, his hours in front of a microphone have contributed to the confusion and the vaccine hesitancy, the vaccine complacency, across the nation. When he was called out on it, instead of saying, 'Actually, I did get that wrong,' he chose instead to blame. Who did he blame? He blamed the scientists and ATAGI. Mr Morrison actually went to the highest institute in terms of determining what is safe and blamed them, rather than accepting his own responsibility. Instead of appropriately communicating the risks of AstraZeneca, Prime Minister Morrison blamed ATAGI, Australia's top advisory body on immunisation, and tried to bully them into changing their advice on its risk and blame them for the glacial speed of the rollout. This is despite their role being to provide advice, because it's ultimately up to the federal government, run by you know who, to implement that advice. It is the fault of no-one but the Prime Minister. Senator Hughes interjecting— Senator O'NEILL 140651 If you want to call him Voldemort—I'll take that interjection, Senator Hughes—go right ahead! He's the man who won't be named, the man who won't take responsibility for anything. Instead of responsibly securing a supply of Pfizer, like Israel, the United States and France, Mr Morrison went cheap, and then he botched the negotiations with Pfizer and then blamed them for the lack of supply. The Prime Minister fatefully said, 'We're not in a race.' Now there is no Australian who can forgive that critical moment, that moment of failure to be a leader, when Mr Morrison decided to say we weren't in a race. He lacks vision for this country. He lacks leadership. He lacks the capacity to own his mistakes. He is a morally flawed individual who is actually putting the whole country at risk through those failures of character. Senior business leaders around the country had to turn to former Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to fix the appalling mess after Mr Morrison completely botched the negotiations. Mr Morrison, according to Pfizer, displayed a 'rude, dismissive and penny-pinching' approach in the negotiations, and he only got 10 million doses, and that was four months after other countries had got theirs. He was offered 40 million doses of Pfizer. Australians, remember that: forty million doses was the offer that Mr Morrison got last June. And, if he had led properly, if he'd taken facts into the decision-making instead of his own hubris, we might not be suffering the lockdown in New South Wales that we are suffering now. The Prime Minister is directly responsible for the shortage of Pfizer. But to hear him tell it, it's everyone else's fault but his. Not content with fighting with Pfizer, though, Mr Morrison then blamed the European Union for not delivering them and AstraZeneca for not shipping three million vaccines on the delayed rollout, which the EU pointed out was actually only a number of 250,000 doses. Everywhere you look in Mr Morrison's comments there are falsehoods, there are self-congratulatory explanations and there is deflection onto anyone else who he thinks should bear the blame. 'Anybody but me,' says Mr Morrison, day in and day out. 'Blame anybody but me.' Yet he is the Prime Minister of Australia. This is happening on his watch. This disaster is happening on Mr Morrison's watch and he is failing the country every single day. 15:53 Senator BROCKMAN 30484 Western Australia I think the Australian people, after listening to that contribution, would be thanking their lucky stars that those opposite are not on the government benches through this terribly challenging time for Australia. The memory of those opposite is extraordinarily poor. The ability to be constructive during one of the biggest challenges that has faced this nation in generations is absent. What do we hear from the other side, apart from carping and negativity? Crickets. Absolutely nothing. They talk about what is happening in the rest of the world in places where the vaccine rollouts are further advanced than Australia's. We are happy to acknowledge, as a government, that there are countries around the world that have vaccine rollouts further advanced than Australia's. But let's just stand back for a moment and look at what is happening in some of those countries. The US, whose vaccine rollout has been lauded by some of those opposite, are currently detecting 100,000 cases a day. Senator O'Neill talked extensively about the AstraZeneca vaccine and its use in the United Kingdom. The UK is getting 20,000 to 30,000 cases per day. It is an absolutely extraordinary idea that the Labor Party is putting forward. I will agree with one thing that Senator O'Neill said, and that is that the AstraZeneca is a very good, high-quality vaccine, and I would absolutely encourage everyone out there to talk to their doctor or talk to a medical professional about getting advice on getting the AstraZeneca vaccine, if it is available to them. It is a high-quality vaccine and it adds to the repertoire that we have available to us here in Australia, thanks to the methodical approach taken by the Morrison government—the approach led by the health advice. Did that approach face some challenges? Absolutely, and we've been upfront with the Australian people about that. Did it face some challenges? Yes. ATAGI did change their advice in terms of age groups as to AstraZeneca. They changed their advice twice, in actual fact. That did reduce the number of people who could access that vaccine at that time, and there was a perception issue around that as well. As I've said in this place before, I myself was caught up in that. I was registered to get an AstraZeneca vaccine. The health advice changed. My vaccine was changed to a Pfizer vaccine. Obviously that did cause some issues. There was also an issue of some deliveries of vaccines from Italy, I believe, earlier last year, which slowed down the availability of doses. But what the Labor Party completely fails to now take into account is what is happening on the ground as we speak. Looking at March this year, there were 770,000 vaccines administered; in April, 1.4 million; in May, 2.1 million; in June, 3.4 million; and, in July, 4.5 million. The Australian people can see what this government is delivering, and that is an accelerating vaccine program. Just in the last few days—I think this was the number from Monday, from memory—there has been a daily increase in doses of 234,899 doses. So there has been a daily increase of almost 235,000 doses. And now we have added to the repertoire of vaccines available in Australia. Very shortly, we will have the Moderna vaccine available in Australia. Obviously, that adds another string to our bow in facing this virus. The Moderna vaccination is a two-dose vaccine, with the doses delivered four weeks apart. The gap is shorter than the gap between AstraZeneca doses, and that does help to speed up the rollout of the vaccines across Australia. Ten million doses of Moderna will be in Australia by the end of this year. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see what that will add to the vaccination rollout in this country. We're going to see a million doses arrive in September, and they will go to pharmacies across the country. Then there will be three million in October, three million in November and three million in December. The Moderna vaccine is safe and effective. Again, this is a message to all Australians out there who are listening and who haven't yet registered to encourage them to get along. It has been approved for use in Britain, Canada, the European Union, the United States, Switzerland and Singapore. Over 140 million doses of the Moderna vaccine have been administered in the United States already, so we've got a very large body of evidence we have been able to draw on when assessing these vaccines. They are 93 per cent effective after six months— The PRESIDENT I0Q Order! Senator Brockman, you will be in continuation. Pursuant to order, we interrupt the debate for the business of the Senate. REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS 64 REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS Social Security (Parenting payment participation requirements - class of persons) Instrument 2021 64 Disallowance 64 16:00 Senator URQUHART 231199 Tasmania At the request of Senator Dodson, I move: That sections 4 and 6 of the Social Security (Parenting payment participation requirements - class of persons) Instrument 2021, made under the Social Security Act 1991, be disallowed. I indicate that Senator Dodson will speak remotely. 15:59 Senator DODSON SR5 Western Australia [by video link] There are times when we, as parliamentarians, are called upon to stand up for those most vulnerable in our society, those who are continuously subjected to bad policy but who have the least resources to challenge it. This is one such occasion. I'm proud to have this disallowance motion in my name on behalf of Labor. If successful, it will have the effect of ending a harmful compulsory requirement for parents of young children to participate in the government's broken ParentsNext program. Under this instrument, the program is currently mandatory for parenting payment recipients who have children under the age of six and meet certain criteria, like age and period of unemployment. It has the worthy goal of helping parents gain the skills needed for employment by the time their youngest child reaches school age. However, as with so many of this government's programs, it has failed grossly in its implementation. Two years after it was rolled out nationally on the back of a very questionable internal evaluation, it has become clear that the ParentsNext program is failing parents, and not only that; it's failing and causing great harm to their children. I originally moved the motion in my capacity as a member of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights. That committee has just undertaken a thorough and damning inquiry into the instrument that is the subject of this disallowance motion and the ParentsNext program generally. I urge all my colleagues in the chamber to read the bipartisan and unanimous report that the committee tabled last week. I consider my membership of the human rights committee as one of my most important roles in the parliament. At its best, it operates in a bipartisan way, clearly undertaking its technical task and providing considered, measured advice to the parliament about the compatibility of all bills and legislative instruments with human rights. Only rarely, and where the most serious concerns are raised, does the committee undertake the kind of in-depth inquiry it has with the ParentsNext program. The report tabled last week demonstrates the serious flaws in the program and the concerns from across the political divide that it is causing harm to vulnerable parents and their children. The committee's unanimous findings are that there is a considerable risk that the compulsory participation in the ParentsNext program impermissibly limits human rights, including the rights of the child, and that the program's financial sanctions mean that a considerable portion of parents are unable to meet their basic needs and those of their children. They are strong findings that cannot be ignored. The committee's unanimous recommendation was that the ParentsNext program be made voluntary for parents of children under the age of six. In seeking to disallow this instrument, Labor is giving effect to this bipartisan recommendation. Several critical pieces of evidence influenced the committee's findings. I would like to speak to each one. First, the committee heard the program is not effective at achieving its stated objective. Importantly, there has been no independent evaluation of the ParentsNext program. In fact, the department brazenly confirmed that there is no intention to conduct one. But the evidence speaks for itself. Of the more than 150,000 parents who participated in ParentsNext between 1 July 2018 and 31 December 2020 just 4,500—three per cent—exited the program as a result of finding stable employment. Multiple witnesses reported parents being required to engage in superfluous or unsuitable activities, such as going to the gym or participating in programs they were already attending. Concerningly, some witnesses even gave evidence of parents who had cause to drop out of self-initiated tertiary or other education due to the onerous requirements imposed by the ParentsNext program. Even more concerningly, the committee report expressed the serious concern that participants are being pushed into jobs that are predominantly low paid, casual or insecure. How is that effective in breaking cycles of disadvantage? Second, there was considerable evidence that the program is doing serious harm to parents and their children. One-third of participants in the ParentsNext program have had their parenting payments suspended under the program's compliance framework for an average of five days—that's five days without income. With approximately half of parenting payment recipients living in financial hardship, many parents whose payments are suspended will be unable to meet their own basic needs and those of their children. Despite this, the government provides no evidence that either a formal or informal assessment of a person's capacity to meet their basic needs or those of their children is undertaken before these parenting payments are suspended, reduced or cancelled. In fact, the picture painted through the committee's inquiry was of a rigid, inflexible bureaucracy imposing punitive sanctions with devastating impacts on families and children. Anyone with a skerrick of empathy could imagine the panic on the face of a parent when they have their meagre income cut off suddenly and have to see through five days of rent and meals without a cent or a penny and have to explain to their kids that there's no money for food or other basics. Many of the committee witnesses gave evidence of the crisis families were thrown into when suspension occurred. Ms Terese Edwards, CEO of the National Council for Single Mothers and their Children, told a harrowing story of a young Indigenous woman from Toowoomba. She said: She needed a letter from the hospital to give an exemption for how unwell her child is. The letter was three or four days late coming, because of the nature of a local hospital. In the interim her income was suspended. She had no money for food, and petrol was limited. I asked her to phone the service … that service only had an answering machine as an option; it was a fly-in, fly-out type of service … Luckily the council managed to get her some emergency funding to help her through and to get the suspension lifted. What kind of program cuts payments to a mother of a sick child? Finally, the committee also examined the disproportionality and discriminatory impact of the program on women and First Nations parents. Ninety-five per cent of program participants are women—most of them single mothers—and 18 per cent are First Nations parents. Concerningly, First Nations parents also make up 31 per cent of participants who receive a demerit under the compliance scheme. Parents experiencing domestic violence are at particular risk if their payments are cut off under the scheme. Mrs Cavanagh-Knez of Zoe Support Australia said: I have a young client who was experiencing family violence and had to flee her home and became homeless and, as a result of that, financially was not able to keep up her payments to her phone plan, so her phone was disconnected. Then, because she wasn't answering the phone calls on the ParentsNext program, her payments were suspended. This is not the kind of country we are. We can do better than this. In fact, we must do better than this for the many single mothers who are raising future generations without financial support. It doesn't have to be this way. Crucially, the committee's report found that after making the program compulsory there were only marginal benefits compared with the two different times when participation was voluntary, including during the pandemic lockdowns last year. The committee concluded: … if participation in ParentsNext were voluntary this could promote a range of human rights and no human rights would be limited. This is exactly what the disallowance will achieve. The government will no doubt try to argue that it would be dangerous and disruptive, but it's their responsibility to fix up their own broken program. Only an incompetent, arrogant government would ignore the carefully considered views of their own backbench to retain this program in its current form. I urge all my colleagues in the chamber to support this disallowance. 16:11 Senator SIEWERT e5z Western Australia I rise to speak on the disallowance of sections 4 and 6 of the Social Security (Parenting payment participation requirements - class of persons) Instrument 2021 and indicate that we will be supporting this disallowance. ParentsNext is a degrading, punitive and coercive program, and it has to go. In fact, I tried to disallow this program back in 2018, and it's devastating to think of the harm that this program has caused since then. I hope this time this disallowance will be successful. Unfortunately, the program has had three years to run, and we have seen the harm that it has caused. This program disrespects women and has negative impacts on children. This motion today would abolish certain classes of compulsory ParentsNext participants. It provides us with an opportunity to listen to the community and make ParentsNext voluntary, and I urge the government to do so. Throw away your ideological obsession with mutual obligations and support this disallowance. ParentsNext devalues the role of parenting and unpaid caring responsibilities. It overlooks the gender division of labour and the amount of labour single mothers do day in, day out. It punishes and stigmatises single mothers. It should never have been mandatory in the first place. Some ParentsNext participants are especially vulnerable. Women affected by domestic violence, those who experience mental ill health and First Nations mothers are deeply affected by this program. Women describe feeling insulted and degraded and having the joy drained out of activities that were previously meaningful to them. They describe the weight and burden of having onerous mutual obligation requirements to meet. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights found, as Senator Dodson just outlined, that compulsory participation in ParentsNext does limit human rights. This is particularly the case for people who have had their parenting payment reduced, suspended or cancelled. If ParentsNext is made voluntary then the government won't be limiting peoples' human rights. We can invest in supportive programs. The constant threat of having their payment suspended can have devastating impacts on parents' mental health. I can only imagine the impact that this then has on children, particularly when seeing their parents so distressed. People who are most likely to face payment suspension include people with intellectual disability, people with mental ill health, people experiencing homelessness or domestic violence and parents of children with high-care needs. The evidence presented to the latest inquiry, and throughout other inquiries that have been done into this program, is clear: the benefits do not outweigh the immediate and long-term harms caused by the ParentsNext program. The women who have been subjected to this punitive program know best, and it's time to listen to them—properly listen. Interviews undertaken by Dr Elise Klein provide insight into the punitive and harmful nature of ParentsNext. One mother told Dr Klein: … "The conditionality is like a new violent relationship – financial and psychologically abusive" … Another woman, with a high-needs daughter, said: It's not that I'm sitting at home watching telly on my bum. Not happening. I'll welcome you to come and watch me, see how busy a single mums life gets with no family support because it's very different to having family here where you can leave the kids with the grandma and then go or have a partner you can safely co-parent with. That's not the case. Another woman, living regionally, talked about the stigma she'd experienced: It is an echo chamber, but that's what happens a lot when you're a single mum … You're stigmatised into the, it's a harsh word, but the useless pile. You're never going to amount to anything, because you've ruined your whole life by not having a husband … We're societal lepers. ParentsNext has done enough damage. The only people who are perhaps calling for this program to be compulsory are the providers, who know there is money to be made from these enforced requirements—money to be made out of participants in the program, out of single mothers. On a fundamental level, ParentsNext does not address the most significant barriers parenting payment recipients face: a payment that is below the poverty line, a lack of access to child care to facilitate work and study, and high effective marginal tax rates that provide a disincentive to re-enter the workforce by taking on part-time paid work. The government must act now to make ParentsNext voluntary: no more punitive requirements and no more payment suspensions. I ask—in fact, I beg—the crossbench to support this motion. Parents need to be supported to raise the next generation. Parenting is so important, and this government, which, I understand, values the role of parents, undermines that with this program. Government, vote with the opposition, with the Greens, who have campaigned on this since this program began, and, hopefully, with the crossbench and make this program voluntary so it can actually do what you claim it is designed to do, which is to help parents and particularly—as the parents in this program are predominantly women—to help women. You are harming them with this program. We will be supporting this disallowance. 16:17 Senator DUNIAM 263418 Tasmania The Morrison government is committed to ensuring that parents receive the assistance that they need to prepare for employment by the time their children reach school age. We understand that, for many people, particularly women, becoming a parent can involve more time spent caring for children and less time in the paid workforce. ParentsNext is ensuring the best opportunity for parents to reach their education and employment goals, well placing them to be job ready by the time their children start school. Since 2018, ParentsNext has assisted over 161,000 parents, with more than 74,000 parents commencing education and almost 40,000 parents commencing employment. The proposed disallowance will fundamentally undermine this program. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 217241 The question is that the disallowance motion, in the name of Senator Dodson, on sections 4 and 6 of the Social Security (Parenting payment participation requirements—class of persons) Instrument 2021 be agreed to.

The Senate divided. [16:22]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator McGrath)

16 AYES Brown, CL Carr, KJ Chisholm, A Farrell, D Gallagher, KR Hanson-Young, SC Lambie, J Lines, S McKim, NJ O'Neill, D Pratt, LC Siewert, R Urquhart, AE (teller) Waters, LJ Watt, M Whish-Wilson, PS 16 NOES Askew, W Brockman, S Canavan, MJ Cash, MC Duniam, J Hume, J McGrath, J McKenzie, B McMahon, S Payne, MA Rennick, G Reynolds, L Roberts, M Ruston, A Seselja, Z Smith, DA (teller) 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 67 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Prime Minister 67 16:25 Senator BROCKMAN 30484 Western Australia Before the interruption I was talking about the recent approval of the Moderna vaccine in Australia; in particular, the fact that 140 million doses have been administered in the United States alone. That is quite a massive evidence base and gives us, Australians, a lot of certainty that this is a vaccine that is well worth considering, along with Pfizer and AstraZeneca. In fact, as I stated, evidence so far shows that it remains some 93 per cent effective six months after the second dose and is 100 per cent effective at preventing death caused by COVID-19. I would urge all those who are weighing up the benefits of vaccination to consider that statistic when making their decision. I would obviously urge everyone, particularly in my home state of Western Australia, to look at the vaccines that are available, talk to their doctors if they have any level of uncertainty, talk to other medical professionals and get vaccinated. All the vaccines are of very high quality and all offer very good protection, and I would certainly urge people, if they can get into a vaccination centre, to do so for Pfizer and AstraZeneca. As of next month, Moderna will also become part of the suite of tools available and the choices that people have. As I stated earlier, we continue to take a very methodical, science based approach. That has been seen in our vaccination rollout. We have listened to the health advice. When the health advice changed, as I said, it did cause some issues with the vaccination rollout, particularly with AstraZeneca, but we listened to the health advice and we responded accordingly. We continue to listen to the health advice and are taking a science based approach by developing the national plan. The Doherty institute has obviously done much work on that. The plan was developed in line with that work conducted by the Doherty institute. It sets out very clearly the four-phase response to the pandemic, beginning with the pre-vaccination phase and ending with the post-vaccination phase. Australians can see that we are in phase A and we continue to suppress the virus for the purpose of minimising community transmissions while we vaccinate. Once we've reached 70 per cent of vaccinations in the eligible 16 years of age or older population, we move to phase B. In phase B, the vaccination transition phase, we seek to maintain the high vaccination rate and minimise serious illness and hospitalisation. Again, I point out that the two vaccines, and the third vaccine that is about to come on stream, all offer very good protection against this virus. I urge all my fellow citizens to be vaccinated. I have had my first dose; I get my second dose next week. I urge everyone to register for their vaccination as soon as they possibly can. 16:29 Senator SIEWERT e5z Western Australia I rise to make a contribution to this MPI on the government's failure to deliver on the vaccine rollout in an effective and timely manner. This is the rollout that wasn't a race and now is a race. In particular, it's a race for the government to try and justify their slowness in this and to try and roll back what we were having a race about in the first place. As delta becomes the dominant variant in Australia, we are seeing more and more young people getting and transmitting COVID. It's clear that the virus is finding a way to infect younger groups—which is, in fact, what was expected of mutations of the virus and of the new variants. While the risk of death is low for younger people, it's evident that if more younger people become infected, more of them will develop more serious illness and, potentially, die. Many may also go on to experience long COVID. We don't know what impacts long COVID will have on young people in particular, and whether it will be with them all their lives. Today Dr Kerry Chant said: We are seeing a number of childcare centre outbreaks and I think we have given advice if you can keep your children home safely please do so. … children can in many ways transmit between themselves. We don't have a clear picture of the long-term impacts of COVID on children. Scientists are racing to find the answer. But why would we want to take a risk and expose young people and children to COVID in the first place? Modelling by the Doherty institute clearly shows the devastating consequences of not including kids under 16 in our vaccination targets. It makes a number of predictions based on us reaching 70 per cent vaccination coverage for over 16s: it predicts that 350,000 children under 16 would get infected with COVID, 3,000 children under 16 would be admitted to hospital with COVID, and 280 children under 16 would be admitted to ICU. Nobody in this country wants to see that. The reason these figures are so high is that the government has excluded kids from our vaccination targets. It's absolutely essential that we include kids in our vaccination targets. The Grattan Institute actually included young people under 16 in their models. We need to sound the alarm bells about the risks the government is taking by only aiming to vaccinate 70 per cent of our population over the age of 16, which is actually 56 per cent of the whole population. We need to make sure our vaccination program is covering young people under the age of 16. It's absolutely critical to ensure that we get effective vaccination of the whole population. It's another failure of this program that the government is not more actively pursuing vaccinating children under the age of 16. This is the reason I've moved a motion for an order for the production of documents. We need to understand what the brief was to the Doherty institute. Why aren't people under the age of 16 being included in our vaccination targets? They should be, and it's outrageous that they're not. (Time expired) 16:33 Senator POLLEY e5x Tasmania [by video link] I rise to speak on this matter of public importance. When a country is in crisis, whether it's at war or experiencing a pandemic, as we are now, the Prime Minister of the day would normally rise to the occasion and develop the leadership skills that the country needs. But, unfortunately, our Prime Minister has failed miserably. First, he attacked Mr Andrews in Victoria for his short, sharp, effective lockdowns. All that the Prime Minister and our colleagues on the other side could do was come into the parliament and ridicule Mr Andrews, day after day. They'd roll out the lines about how New South Wales was the 'rolled-gold standard' of how to deal with a pandemic. Mr Morrison has failed on every count. He established the national cabinet to deal with the pandemic as a way of trying to share the blame around. He has blamed the scientists. He has blamed the vaccine manufacturers. He blames everyone else for his failure. He has people on his own back bench who are causing issues now with whether or not masks are an effective way of stopping the spread of this very serious COVID-19 delta strain, and he has failed to address these backbenchers. He has failed to accept responsibility for the failure of his aged-care minister and his health minister. He had two jobs during this pandemic. One was to secure and roll out enough vaccines for all Australians, to prevent the tragedies that we see unfolding in New South Wales at this very time, with people dying. The other was to take responsibility for setting up quarantine, and he has failed on that count. We knew from the outset that hotel quarantine was never going to work, but, no, he blamed the states once again. He blamed the security officers. He blamed everyone. Well, the buck firmly stops with you, Prime Minister. You're the captain of this ship. You told the Australian community that there was no race, that we didn't have to panic about not having the vaccines rolling out in a timely way. But this is a race. This is a race to save people's lives. Last year we saw so many older Australians dying from COVID-19 because of the failings of the aged-care minister. What we see now is young people dying from COVID-19, and my heart goes out to their families. But when a Prime Minister has a health minister who has failed and an aged-care minister who has failed, and when he has to bring in the Army, that is only reinforcing his failure to show the leadership that we desperately need in this country. He has backbenchers going out and causing hysteria about whether or not COVID is really worse than the flu and whether or not you should wear a mask. The buck stops with you, Prime Minister. You've failed to secure enough vaccines. Over the weekend, my home state of Tasmania was advised that, as of next Monday, people in the community would be able to be vaccinated through certain pharmacies, but here we are on Wednesday afternoon and we still do not know who has been approved by the Commonwealth and the state Liberal government to give those jabs in arms. We don't know which pharmacies, so how can anyone apply to make an appointment to get that jab? Once again, it just proves that Scott Morrison is all about the spin and the photo opportunities but never about the follow-up. He has failed, just as he did last year with the bushfires. He said, 'Oh, it's just too hard; I don't hold a hose,' and flew off to Hawaii. Sorry, but when you have the job of being Prime Minister, you have to take responsibility. And people respect you if you own up and say: 'Look, I stuffed up. We didn't buy enough vaccines. We haven't rolled them out. Our ministers have failed.' Sack the minister for health, sack the minister for aged care and put in people who can do the job. But you've failed even to do that. Scott Morrison, people in this country are depending on you—vulnerable people, young people. You have failed people over and over again. It is about time you stepped up, because this is a race and you've failed at every hurdle that you've tried to get over. It's time for a new captain of the team. (Time expired) 16:38 Senator HUGHES 273828 New South Wales I guess it helps that I find Bill Murray more funny than annoying, because I'm pretty sure that we've all slipped into some sort of Senate version of Groundhog Day. But, unfortunately for those opposite, they really haven't seemed able to adapt. As we come back, day after day after day, they still seem to be stepping in that puddle. Let's go through the meaning of the word 'exponential' again, for those still struggling with the maths and those still clinging to the notion that somehow their role is to pull Australia down, to confuse and mislead the Australian public and contribute to vaccine misinformation and hesitancy. Yesterday we saw just shy of 256,000 vaccinations delivered. That is over a quarter of a million vaccinations in one day. And these record days—they just keep coming. We're now in a situation where 45 per cent of eligible Australians have received their first dose, so we're getting very close to 50 per cent, and, as we hit those days with a quarter of a million jabs, it's going to be here before you know it. But with the second dose, we've now hit 23 per cent. Almost one-quarter of all eligible Australians have now been fully vaccinated—not that you'll hear a word from those opposite. I am glad that Senator Farrell and Senator Chisholm are sitting down, because there are a couple of things that I kind of almost agree with them on! There were delays in getting the vaccines approved. I think they did take a little bit too long. We know that some vaccines were being administered overseas sooner than they were here. They were being rolled out faster than they are here. But that was because we had an independent TGA process that wasn't pushed through. There were no shortcuts. We didn't look to circumnavigate it somehow and get them out more quickly. And the reason is that, unlike what was happening in the US, Europe and the UK, we weren't seeing hundreds and thousands of people dying. We weren't seeing these outbreaks that were affecting hundreds and thousands of people every single day. We actually had a bit of time to make sure we went through the processes. I can only imagine what those on that side would have been going on about, had we skipped those steps, had we cut a corner, had we sped it through. The outcry would have been deafening. But, of course, the people on that side don't remember that. Their memory is incredibly short; in fact, it's groundhog day, or perhaps it's better to describe them as a bunch of goldfish. I've got to be honest, I am actually quite confused—as I'm sure most of my colleagues on this side are—about what Labor actually want, what they actually support and what they actually think should have happened. No-one knows, because they swap and change and move around and twist and turn every second of the day. I heard a claim about guinea pigs today, and, when we talk about the proper processes of authorisation and approving the vaccines, I'm not quite sure where that even came from. But as they move into their perpetual whine and try and find their next line of attack—based on fallacy, based on misleading information—I just thought I'd go through a couple of the interjections we heard during question time today. Senator Wong called out, and I think it may have been responding to one of my interjections, and I appreciate the President's ruling that all interjections are unruly and out of order. But Senator Wong claimed over the chamber to me that we were 12 months behind. Now, I don't even know how this is possible—and I know maths isn't their strong suit on that side; I know they struggle a little bit over there with the numbers. But the first vaccine was approved for emergency use in the US on 11 December 2020. Now, by anyone's maths, that's eight months ago. So if Senator Wong can just inform the chamber how we're 12 months behind in the vaccine rollout when the vaccine was wasn't even there—I mean, I realise that Labor talk in mistruths and misleading information, but, you know, one fact every now and then wouldn't hurt them. For those opposite who don't understand, this vaccine has been developed and approved and rolled out in record speed. The pandemic started, what, in February or March last year? Previous to the development of these COVID-19 vaccines, the shortest time for a vaccine to be developed and approved and to start to be administered was four years, and that was for the mumps. That was the fastest vaccine ever. This one's been done in absolute record time, and, in fact, the operation was called Operation Warp Speed in the US. But some of us who have memories longer than the goldfish remember how much Labor were not happy with that. They felt that the vaccines were being pushed through. They weren't happy with the new technology and certainly not the mRNA, because that was new—we couldn't have that! But now, all of a sudden, there's not enough of it, we didn't buy it before it was approved, we didn't buy it before it had been tested—we certainly didn't buy it before it had gone through TGA processes. They would have been over there complaining, had we spent all this money on a vaccine that then didn't get approved. But Labor never let the facts get in the way of a good scare campaign, something we know they are so fond of. So, as per usual, those opposite are about as clear as the Mehi after a flood, and as full of as much rubbish and old debris as well. I thought maybe we should invite those opposite to commit to answers in writing to some of these questions, and not only so some of us, and the rest of the Australian people, can get some clarity as to what they actually think. It might also serve as a little reminder for them when they need to go back and check, 'Well, hang on, what did I actually think about this a month ago, a week ago, yesterday or 10 minutes ago?' I'm not quite sure consistency is their strong suit. I am intrigued to find out whether or not we're now going to see another AZ-type scaremongering campaign because there's a third vaccine in the mix. In hommage to the member for Goldstein, I assume those opposite are participating in a Jimmy-Rees-like form of comedy skit and that we will be seeing these fear campaigns rolled out using the correct pronunciation as to whether we prefer the 'Pffffiiiizer' or the 'Modern-A'. You guys are clearly trying to participate in some kind of comedy act, because you're certainly not working with any form of fact. Do you know anything about the difference between the Moderna and the Pfizer? Do you understand any of the differences other than the brand name? I can tell you what I know and what anyone with a reading level above grade 3 knows: all vaccines are effective—all of them. All vaccines are effective. All of the vaccines are at the highest safety level, and all of the vaccines are hundreds and thousands of times less likely to kill or injure you than COVID, so just get vaccinated. Stop going out there with your brand based scare campaigns. You and your mates Jeanette Young, Norman Swan and the guy who's not even a doctor, Bill Bowtell: just go away. You are less correct than a broken watch most days. Maybe I'm just feeling kind—it's Wednesday, I'm wearing pink, and maybe we're a bit warm—but here's another shocker for you: I want to say, 'Well done, Dan Andrews; good on you, Dan.' The Premier of Victoria is out there telling young people to go get the AstraZeneca, absolutely supporting the AZ, Australian jobs and Australian manufacturing. It's an effective vaccine. There's plenty of it around. Let's get out there and get it in those arms. I'm not a big fan of the Premier of Victoria. I'm not sure whether his brothels-not-families lockdown route is really the one we want to go down. It's all a bit unclear how Victoria has really been doing on this, but Dan Andrews's calls on the AZ are spot-on. Perhaps he's just backing in his Victorian mate the member for Maribyrnong, who's currently in the process of resurrecting, Lazarus-style, his leadership ambitions. To everyone in New South Wales: there are now hubs and buses out there. I love it! Get them out! It's so good. You know what? Park them on the corners. Park them in the shopping centres. And, just because I know how much you love it that they're still open in New South Wales, park them in a Bunnings car park. Go and get your Seasol for your veggie patch. You can't get your sausage sandwich, but go get a vaccine, every time you pop into Bunnings—you could get shot 1 and shot 2. Gosh, imagine how many people would be vaccinated at that rate! I would like to give a shout-out in particular today to the pop-up clinic in the Sydney LGA that I live in, Redfern and Waterloo. From today through to Saturday, every day between 10 and four, it will be providing the AstraZeneca for anyone 18 or over who wants it. As well, it's very clearly advertised, I'd just like to say, that it is the AstraZeneca. So when you see the ABC report on Sunday, because they managed to find one guy who'd turned up and then had a whinge because he thought he was coming to get the 'Pffffiiiizer'—it's the AZ. It's very well publicised: 'AstraZeneca available'. To everyone in that Redfern and Waterloo area in the inner city of Sydney, around the eastern suburbs: make sure you get over to Woolloomooloo and Waterloo to get that vaccine, because, as the great Richo acknowledged, we need to do whatever it takes. (Time expired) 16:48 Senator ROBERTS 266524 Queensland The subject is blame, and I'll return to that in a minute, but I can't let the previous speaker's comments go. These vaccines have been provisionally approved. The testing is not complete, because the TGA admits it sees merit in bypassing the testing procedures because of perceived urgency. That is it. They are provisionally approved. They are not fully tested. They rely on the manufacturers' recommendations and the manufacturers' testing. That's it. At the same time, we see a drug that has been proven safe, now proven effective in clinical trials, in practical real-world trials, in many countries. We see it actually treating COVID successfully, curing COVID successfully and being a prophylactic to prevent COVID and prevent its transmission. That drug is ivermectin. It has been approved in many countries for 60 years; 3.7 billion doses have been given around the world. It has been approved in this country since 2013 for treating various illnesses. It has not been approved for COVID. There are doctors now wanting to use it. There are some doctors actually using it because they're so concerned about people's health. So we've got a situation in which a minister is bypassing some empirical evidence—there are overseas clinical trials yet he's ignoring them—that could really change the situation in this country. It would change it, just as it has in India and other countries. In the meantime, all we've got is a blame game, exactly as this motion says. The blame game is not just from the Prime Minister. It's from state premiers, state bureaucrats, health ministers and federal ministers. In the meantime, no-one is talking about the people's needs. (Time expired) 16:50 Senator WALSH 252157 Victoria [by video link] Prime Minister Morrison must be allergic to responsibility, judging by the lengths that he goes to in order to avoid facing a problem and doing something about it. I wonder if he checked the job description before he decided to stick his hand up to be Prime Minister, because, if he did, he should know that the first job of being Prime Minister is to keep Australians safe—not photo ops, not slogans, not money for mates but keeping Australians safe. Time and again we see that, when the Prime Minister fails to do his job, he looks for someone else to blame. Lockdowns caused by leaks from hotel quarantine? Well, blame the state premiers! Low vaccination rates? Well, blame the health advisers; blame the Australian people. Continued outbreaks in aged-care facilities? Blame the essential workers. But the people of Australia know who is really responsible. Who has failed to deliver a national, purpose-built quarantine system? It's Prime Minister Scott Morrison. Who failed to order enough vaccines and instead decided that it wasn't a race? Prime Minister Scott Morrison. Who failed to get aged-care staff vaccinated by Easter? Again, Prime Minister Scott Morrison. This is who we have leading the biggest national health response in a hundred years: a Prime Minister who blames low-paid essential and insecure workers in aged care, rather than doing what is necessary to keep people safe. Four months after he promised that every aged-care worker would be vaccinated, only one-third have received both doses, because there just weren't enough vaccines to give them. Then he pinned the blame on the aged-care workers. He set a deadline for them to get vaccinated or leave the jobs that they love, but then he went to ground when it came to doing his part. He didn't ensure supply. He didn't ensure that it would get to the workers. He didn't ensure that they could access the vaccines that they need. The Senate Select Committee on Job Security recently heard evidence from aged-care workers and employers about just how hard it has been to get vaccinated. Employers reported that it wasn't staff hesitancy but the lack of access to vaccines which was delaying the rollout. Mr Greg Reeve, CEO of Heritage Care, said: … it's been the accessibility. … There doesn't seem to be a significant reluctance to getting vaccinated; it has been about access to the particular drugs required. Carolyn Smith from the United Workers Union also outlined the barriers that aged-care workers face. She said: Imagine a worker who lives in an outermetro area and works across two different facilities, sometimes up to 50 hours a week, all at the times when immunisation clinics or GP clinics are open. She was told there was going to be Commonwealth run vaccination in her facility and when she turned up she was told it was only for residents and only if there were any leftovers would she get the vaccination. Aged-care workers have been trying to get vaccinated, as is required by the national cabinet, but they have been trying to get access to vaccines that don't exist and at times when GPs are open and hubs are open. Without urgent action, what hope do they have? Prime Minister Morrison has failed on aged-care vaccinations. He failed to ensure that staff had access to the vaccinations they need. He failed to meet his Easter deadline, and I wonder exactly who he is going to blame when he fails to meet his new, re-worked September deadline when aged-care workers trying to do the right thing with no support will be faced with losing their jobs. In a time of crisis, Australia needs a real leader. Instead, Prime Minister Morrison has shown he is prepared to throw anyone under the bus to avoid his responsibility—even Liberal state premiers, health advisers, the people of Australia, and the dedicated, essential and hardworking aged-care workers of this country. He has shown that he won't even take responsibility for members of his own government. How can we call him a leader when he allows members of his own government to spout dangerous misinformation— (Time expired) 16:56 Senator SCARR 282997 Queensland This is the second matter of public importance I have spoken on this week. It's somewhat sad that the content hasn't improved. We're meant to be debating matters of public interest, and, from my perspective, I don't think the public is particularly interested in a blame game taking place. I think the public expects those in positions of authority to take responsibility with respect to matters within their authority. When people wish to criticise those in positions of public authority—whatever that position is, whether they be a prime minister, a premier or a senior public servant—I think there is a reasonable expectation that those who are critical should also put forward constructive suggestions and ideas. I don't think there is any public interest in a blame game occurring in this place. I think the public is more interested in looking forward and looking for solutions. This debate shouldn't be simply about political pointscoring. It's an opportunity to debate a matter of public interest. It's an opportunity to provide constructive suggestions and advice and it's an opportunity, I think, to soberly reflect on the current situation and look forward in terms of promoting solutions. I quoted these same words on Monday in relation to the first MPI I spoke on earlier this week, and I'll say it again. Our Prime Minister Scott Morrison said, 'I take the responsibility for the early setback in our vaccination program.' End quote. An honourable senator interjecting— Senator SCARR 282997 No, that's the quote. There were no 'buts'. He said, 'I take the responsibility for the early setback in our vaccination program.' End quote. Senator Whish-Wilson interjecting— Senator SCARR 282997 There was no 'however'. I'll take the interjection from Senator Whish-Wilson. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT F49 It's disorderly to interject, and I would ask Senator Scarr not to take the disorderly interjection. Continue, Senator Scarr. Senator SCARR 282997 Okay, I won't take the disorderly interjection. The Prime Minister did also say that he should also take responsibility for the positive things that have happened, and I think that's quite a fair and reasonable position to take, but he did say, 'I take the responsibility for the early setback in our vaccination program.' I think that should be recognised. It was in part recognised by Senator Whish-Wilson in his disorderly interjection, which I'm not going to respond to, Madam Acting Deputy President. At least it was partly recognised by Senator Whish-Wilson, but it's a bit unfortunate that it hasn't been recognised by any other previous speaker in this debate. So the Prime Minister did take responsibility. It is fit and proper that he take responsibility. We have a Westminster system and the Prime Minister should take responsibility. But, having said that, as we all know, with something as complicated as a vaccine rollout in a country like Australia by the Commonwealth government it isn't government by soliloquy or by a single individual. There are whole departments of people involved in this process. There are the scientific advisers. There is ATAGI. There is the Scientific Advisory Council, which gave advice on what vaccines should be ordered and on the program. There was the medical advice coming from experts. I say to everyone who might be listening to this: please, take your advice from the medical experts. Please take your advice from them. They're the people you should be listening to—your local GP, your local pharmacist and medical experts. Take advice from the experts. The Prime Minister did that, as the Australian people would expect him to do. We're in the position we're now in and the Prime Minister has taken responsibility. It's extraordinarily pleasing that there has been a material acceleration in the rollout. If those opposite were being reasonable, that would be recognised. The first million vaccine doses took 45 days to roll out— (Time expired) 17:01 Senator WHISH-WILSON 195565 Tasmania I think the one thing Australians can be sure about in this time of chaos and complexity is that the one race that our Prime Minister will win and would win under any circumstances is how fast you can run away from responsibility. I just hope that at the next election, which will no doubt be in the next nine months, the Australian people run as fast as they can away from this government and vote with their feet. When I heard Senator Cash talking in question time today, with the coalition asking themselves a question about how many terror attacks they have foiled since 2014, I noted that it's usually a sign that they've hit political rock bottom when that's what they start talking about. I read in Malcolm Turnbull's book over Christmas with interest his discussion about Tony Abbott's reign of terror in this place, hiding behind the flag and trying to throw this out there amongst the Australian people. It is the government's No. 1 role to protect its citizens, but it is absolutely failing to do that with this vaccine rollout. This is a major crisis and the government have failed to protect the Australian people. So it's no wonder the government are going back to questions they haven't asked themselves for years about foiling terror attacks. What about climate change, the biggest threat we face? Yesterday was all the evidence we need that this government has also failed to protect the Australian people and failed in its duty of care to future generations. Mr Barnaby Joyce said just this morning on the radio, 'We don't have to come up with a plan for climate change in 2050.' That's just like they haven't come up with a plan for vaccinating this country. This government is a mess, and we need to bring a broom. 17:03 Senator CICCONE 281503 Victoria [by video link] I'd also like to thank Senator O'Neill for bringing this matter before the chamber today, because it is indeed a matter of the greatest public importance in our country. In her home state of New South Wales there are now more regional parts of New South Wales in lockdown. As I speak to you now, I'm doing so from a city under lockdown yet again. There are some five million people in Melbourne, all of whom, for the most part, are currently confined to their homes. They're free to leave for barely a few hours a day for their daily exercise. Sadly, this has been a reality for Melburnians for quite some time now and may very well be for some time yet. But it is not just Melbourne that is affected by the latest wave of transmission. As we know, Sydney, Brisbane and Adelaide all have experienced lockdowns of their own in recent weeks. In the case of Sydney, we may very well see their lockdown continue for weeks, if not months. Whilst there is no doubt that a multitude of factors has meant the circumstances we are currently living in, there is equally no doubt that the most significant among them is this government's failure to deliver on the vaccine rollout. One would have thought that, in such a case, the government would take responsibility for such failure. Certainly this is what we've seen from previous governments. I wonder if any of us could envisage former prime ministers ducking and running and finger-pointing at everyone under the sun, as this Prime Minister has. Whether it be ATAGI or Pfizer or AstraZeneca or state and territory governments or vaccine clinics or working Australians, everyone has had some share in the burden of the blame except the Prime Minister himself, of course, because he seems to blame everyone else. As bad as this rollout is in our major cities, however, we must not forget that the challenges are greater in regional and remote communities. We already know that those in regional and remote communities have poorer health outcomes than those in metropolitan areas. This is not something that is new. Those of us in this place who have lived in regional areas or who have travelled to them extensively know full well the extent of this problem: doctors frequently coming and going, clinics not always open, specialists hundreds of kilometres away. These systemically poor health outcomes have meant that Australians in the country are inherently more vulnerable to COVID. As a result, it is these Australians that have the highest price to pay for the government's vaccine failure. It is these Australians that will feel the health repercussions of this most prominently. Australians in regional and remote communities cannot afford further failures. They cannot afford more buck-passing and finger-pointing. What they need are outcomes, not excuses. As reported in the Herald Sun today, Victorian doctors are administering fewer than half as many vaccine doses as their New South Wales counterparts every single day, leaving my home state behind in the race to meet the targets to reopen. Sadly, this is a government that is more interested in laying blame at the feet of others than in getting on with the job of delivering for our community. I share the disappointment of my fellow Victorians who live throughout country Victoria and who feel let down and at risk because of this government's decision-making. Whilst I cannot promise them that this government will eventually step up and do what's necessary to keep them safe, I can promise that I and all members on this side of the House will not cease to hold the government to account on their behalf. 17:07 Senator STEELE-JOHN 250156 Western Australia [by video link] All disabled people who want to get vaccinated need to be able to do just that, and we need to be able to do it urgently. The Morrison government has failed to meet its 1a and 1b targets, and right now there is no plan, no pathway, not even a trail of breadcrumbs to guide us as a community to how to get vaccinated, to give us all the protection that we need. Once again it is the disability community that have been abandoned by our government, and once again it is the disability community that have had to rise, work together and make a clear demand of the government to ensure that we are protected from COVID-19. The community are calling for a list of actions to be taken immediately, and I want to read them in detail to the chamber. First of all, there is a need to urgently develop and implement a clear and publicly available plan to fully vaccinate disabled people, including people in congregate care settings, disabled people over 12 and those who are not NDIS participants; urgently develop and implement a clear and publicly available plan to vaccinate the close contacts of disabled people—a key aspect that is often missed in these conversations—and release data each week about the number of disabled people and their close contacts who are vaccinated. There is a need for the proper provision of PPE and the creation of a dedicated and fully accessible vaccination booking system to ensure that all call-out services are properly promoted so that we can get vaccinated in our place of residence. The Greens will not risk the lives of disabled and young people, and we will ensure that, as we move to change the way we respond, the needs of our community are centred. (Time expired) The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT F49 The time for the discussion has expired. DOCUMENTS 73 DOCUMENTS Consideration 73 COMMITTEES 73 COMMITTEES Community Affairs Legislation Committee 73 Additional Information 73 17:09 Senator McGRATH 217241 Queensland On behalf of the Chair of the Community Affairs Legislation Committee, Senator Askew, I present additional information received by the committee in its inquiry into the provisions of the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 1) Bill 2021. Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation Committee 74 Delegated Legislation Monitor 74 17:10 Senator McGRATH 217241 Queensland On behalf of the Chair of the Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation, Senator Fierravanti-Wells, I present Delegated Legislation Monitor No. 12 of 2021, and I move: That the Senate take note of the report. I understand that Senator Fierravanti-Wells intends to speak to this report. 17:10 Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS e4t New South Wales I appreciate this opportunity to speak to the tabling of the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation Committee's Delegated Legislation Monitor No. 12 of 2021. I would like to highlight three instruments outlined in chapter 1 of the monitor which raise significant technical scrutiny concerns. The first instrument is the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Amendment (2021 Measures No. 2) Regulations 2021. These regulations amend the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Regulation 2013 to alter the governance standards relating to charities engaged in or the promotion of unlawful activities. Failure to comply with these governance standards may result in revocation of a charity's registration or the exercise of other enforcement powers under the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Act 2012, the ACNC Act. As set out in the monitor, the committee has significant outstanding scrutiny concerns about the instrument. These concerns are heightened by the high level of correspondence and concerns the committee has received from members of the public and charitable groups. In particular, the committee is concerned about the obligations the instrument imposes on charities to maintain reasonable internal control procedures to prevent the use of their resources to promote another entity's unlawful actions. The committee considers this will require the ACNC Commissioner to make a subjective judgement, noting that they must have regard to the individual circumstances of each charity. This appears to enable the ACNC Commissioner to exercise broad discretionary powers without any clear guidance or limitations on the face of the primary legislation or regulations. In addition, the committee is concerned about the instrument's potential impact on the implied freedom of political communication. It appears that the instrument may restrict a charity's ability to support or promote certain types of political protest, without having committed any unlawful act themselves. In the absence of further information, it is unclear whether this requirement impermissibly burdens the implied freedom in its terms, operation or effect. Unfortunately, the Assistant Treasurer has not yet provided a clear explanation as to how the instrument as a whole does not impermissibly restrict the implied freedom. The committee looks forward to receiving further advice from the Assistant Treasurer in relation to the committee's ongoing scrutiny concerns. The second instrument is the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Implementing the Technology Investment Roadmap) Regulations 2021. This instrument expands the operating remit of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency to permit it to invest in a wide range of technologies, including low-emissions technologies. The chamber will recall a similar instrument was disallowed on 22 June. The committee thanks the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction for his comprehensive response to the committee's scrutiny concerns in relation to the disallowed instrument. However, we remain concerned that the instrument is expanding the remit of ARENA beyond what was envisaged by parliament when the enabling act was passed. The committee also maintains its view is that these measures go beyond filling out the detail of the act and that they therefore appear more appropriate for parliamentary enactment. In addition, it is unclear to the committee whether the new regulations may be considered the same in substance as the disallowed regulations and therefore invalid. The committee seeks the minister's advice in relation to this. The third instrument is the Australia's Foreign Relations State and Territory Arrangement Rules 2020. The committee has corresponded with the Minister for Foreign Affairs in relation to this instrument on numerous occasions since March this year. I note that it took several rounds of correspondence and substantial committee resources before the committee's scrutiny concerns were resolved. The rules set out significant matters that go to the scope of the newly established Foreign Arrangements Scheme. Specifically, it provides that certain arrangements are exempt from the notification and approval provisions of the enabling act. 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. Yesterday the minister advised that she would progress an amendment to the instrument to provide that it repeals within five years of commencement. The committee thanks the minister for her engagement in relation to this and welcomes her undertaking, as this will allow for appropriate parliamentary oversight of measures set out in the instrument. In light of the minister's undertaking, earlier today I withdrew the committee's notice of motion to disallow the instrument. With these comments, I commend the committee's Delegated Legislation Monitor 12 of 2021 to the Senate. 17:15 Senator WATERS 192970 Queensland I seek leave to continue our remarks later, noting that Senator Siewert, who is in a committee meeting at the moment, would like to make a contribution on this. Leave granted; debate adjourned. Scrutiny of Bills Committee 75 Scrutiny Digest 75 17:16 Senator URQUHART 231199 Tasmania On behalf of the chair of the Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Senator Polley, I present Scrutiny Digest 12 of 2021. Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee 75 Report 75 17:17 Senator CHISHOLM 39801 Queensland At the request of the chair of the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee, Senator Sterle, I present the report of the committee, Management of the Inland Rail project, together with accompanying documents, and I move: That the Senate take note of the report. I thank Senator Sterle for the tabling of this important report. I first visited communities within Queensland impacted by Inland Rail in 2018 in Cecil Plains, and I was struck by the fact there with so many people who were going to be impacted by the Inland Rail proposal that were just being paid lip-service by the government and by the Inland Rail Authority itself. So I was pleased after the 2019 election that an inquiry was set up by the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee. I thank the chair of that committee, Senator Sterle, and the other members for the work that they have put into this over numerous years but particularly the amount of travel that they dedicated to this. As people would know, the Inland Rail is obviously a big project and they covered off many of the geographic areas down in Melbourne, through regional New South Wales, in South-East Queensland and indeed in Gladstone itself—which is an issue I will talk about soon. My concern about Inland Rail, based on the work I had done through impacted communities in South-East Queensland, is that all these concerns were being raised and there was all this consultation that was supposedly taking place, yet no-one was taking the concerns of these residents seriously. Whether it be the impact of flooding on Cecil Plains, the impact on business in that area, the way it comes down the range from Toowoomba into Ipswich and the impact of the noise on those local communities—let alone where it is supposedly due to terminate, in Acacia Ridge—and the thousands and thousands of truck movements that will result from that, again, the local residents hadn't been adequately consulted. It was through this process that I also came to learn more about Gladstone and the potential of Gladstone as a destination for Inland Rail and the fact that it had never actually been adequately consulted. I'm going to focus my remarks on Queensland, because my community involvement was dedicated to those hearings in Queensland. Everywhere you go in Queensland, there are problems associated with the proposed route of Inland Rail. The cost has already blown out. We know it was $4.7 billion, and then it went up to $14.3 billion. And even under that proposal they haven't actually said how it is going to get down the range from Toowoomba into Brisbane. We know that when the second road line was built through there that cost $4 billion, so you can imagine the cost of building a rail network from Toowoomba down the range. They're saying that's going to be done in a PPP, but someone would have to pay for that. So the cost of this project is absolutely enormous, and it seems like the government have taken their eyes off the ball. They're not focused on the issues that the communities have been facing. They're not actually trying to sort those problems out. They are just saying that they're going to plough on with this project. I was particularly pleased that the committee took the opportunity to have a hearing in Gladstone. The work that the fantastic Mayor of Gladstone, Matt Burnett, and the Mayor of Banana, Nev Ferrier, have been putting in with surrounding communities shows the potential. You couldn't see a more stark contrast between the communities of Banana and Gladstone councils and the concern that we've heard through South-East Queensland, where we've got one community that would welcome this project and another that has so much concern about the disruption that will be caused to people's daily lives. As part of this committee report, the government need to ensure that they're consulting with these communities but also that the Inland Rail authority don't just pay lip-service to communities. When they actually have consultation, they should genuinely listen and consult. Of everyone that I have spoken to—and it would be tens and tens of people who were part of these consultative committees—I haven't met one who's had a good experience. I had plenty of them that were dedicated; they turned up. But after a while they were exasperated and could not see that they were being taken seriously. They felt as though they were like mushrooms—just being fed rubbish and expected to go along with it. So this report is an important one. I think the recommendations are very good. The focus on Gladstone is one that I'm pleased with. That is of enormous potential. But the business case needs to be updated; it is out of date and needs to be considered, and that is something where Gladstone should also be considered. As I said, the committee heard from many advocates arguing the connection to Gladstone, including Mr Abbott, who's been appointed by the councils up there and also the Regional Development Authority to put together a proposal, which was compelling and something that should be seriously considered by this government. Again, there was a focus on the cost. We heard that the estimated cost of the rail link coming from Toowoomba to Brisbane is about 50 per cent of the cost for 10 per cent of the distance. That gives you a sense of how expensive it is to get down the range and into Brisbane—let alone the proposal that was floated by the member for Bonner. He has delivered very little in the time he's been here, but he's all of a sudden proposing some sort of a tunnel to be used, despite the tunnel having no money behind it and no distinct route to follow. The impact on residents in Acacia Ridge and those where the trucks would travel would be absolutely dramatic. We heard from groups from the border down into the Scenic Rim, through Logan. The Mayor of Logan himself is someone who has raised his concerns with the committee. His focus was on the number of trains that would be travelling along the route. He said: With the introduction of Inland Rail, this frequency is expected to increase to 45 trains a day, running 24 hours a day, by 2040. In addition to the increased frequency, these trains could be up to 3.6 kilometres long, and about 40 per cent of each would have capability to be double stacked. These are substantial increases in his community in Logan. We also heard from the community in Acacia Ridge. I did a forum with the fantastic member for Moreton, Graham Perrett, to which we invited people from Acacia Ridge to come and have their say. Again, they raised the lack of consultation, the fact that no proper study had been done, the impact of extra trains and the fact that there would be thousands and thousands more truck movements through that part of the world. I never had a lot of time for the former member for Moreton Gary Hardgrave, but he is now chair of the local community consultation committee. He explained that there was genuine concern in the community in the Moreton electorate. He said: … Acacia Ridge is not purpose built for the task, and to deliver the sort of additional freight truck tasks onto south side roads would be devastating for the areas from Acacia Ridge to the port of Brisbane. I know that Mr Hardgrave isn't always flavour of the month with those opposite, but I think on this issue he's speaking the truth. He is more in touch with what's going on in the Moreton community than this government is. Indeed, I think you could replicate that statement with regard to the entire south side, Toowoomba and from Gowrie to the border as well. It is clear the current Acacia Ridge proposal is inadequate, and the committee understands that there may be multi-intermodal options across South-East Queensland. Again, Inland Rail, all of a sudden about six weeks ago, said that Acacia Ridge was under review. We asked, 'When did it come under review?' and they said, 'It was always under review.' Once they're under a bit of pressure from local communities, they seem to make things up to justify what they're doing, rather than genuinely taking the concerns on board. As I mentioned before, my involvement with this came from the concerns of affected farmers on the Condamine floodplain. It's pleasing that, as part of this report, we commend them for their efforts. They paid, out of their own pockets, for independent modelling to look at the impact of floods on the region and, basically, dispute what the ARTC findings were. They went to the expense of using their own money to question what the ARTC were putting forward. We acknowledge the work that they have done. In the report, we also emphasised the comment by DA Hall that the level of discrepancy would destroy people's homes and destroy their businesses and livelihoods. This report is so important because it does highlight some of the concerns that the ARTC and Inland Rail have not taken seriously. The Senate committee have done a good job on that. I commend Senator Sterle. I seek leave to continue my remarks later. Leave granted. 17:27 Senator RENNICK 283596 Queensland I rise to speak to the report of the Rural and Regional Affairs References Committee on the Inland Rail. It's about a part of Queensland that, like Senator Chisholm, I'm very passionate about, not least because I grew up there. I'd like to add my support to what Senator Chisholm said about a Gladstone route. Ideally, that would go along parallel to the Leichhardt Highway, from Goondiwindi up through Miles, Wandoan, Taroom, Theodore and then eventually on to Gladstone. That would open up possibilities, because there are a lot of coal beds along that route, and there's also the Nathan Dam. It's a massive dam that could capture a lot of water to be diverted southwards into the Murray-Darling as well as to provide the people on the Dawson River with a lot more water security. If we could get a rail line up through there, we could open up new coal deposits. Also, if we didn't want more coalmines, we could look at putting a nuclear power station in Barakula State Forest, which is just north of Chinchilla. It's the biggest state forest in the Southern Hemisphere. If you had a big water source there, the Nathan Dam, you could open up a lot of possibilities. It's really important that we create wealth through that region, because that region has been hard done by. It is where a lot of maternity wards have been closed by none other than the Queensland Labor government. They're trying to shut down the Theodore maternity ward, and I'm pleased to acknowledge the good efforts of Colin Boyce, who has been fighting very hard to keep it open. Colin is running for election in the electorate of Flynn. He's replacing Ken O'Dowd on the LNP side. Miles has also had its maternity ward closed down. Just down the road, 48 kilometres away, my home town, Chinchilla, has also had its maternity ward closed down. So it would be great if we were to open up railway lines, build more dams and generate more royalties from coalmines. We could use that money to put back the maternity wards that state Labor have closed down. While we're at it, we could probably buy back a few of the poker machines that were allowed into Queensland under Wayne Goss as well. We really don't need any or more of those things in Queensland; they've done nothing but destroy families. I know that Labor always talk a big game when it comes to looking after women. I think it's about time they reversed their policies of the last 30 years and actually shut down the poker machines and reopened some maternity wards, which is what used to happen under the prior Liberal National Party government. I know my good friends here, Senator Reynolds and Senator Cash, are from the great state of WA, and they don't need poker machines, so I fail to see why the rest of the states in this country need poker machines. I just want to touch on the inland route going through to Toowoomba, which I was never in favour of. I was always in favour of the original route, which was going to go down through Warwick—in what they call dog-burr country—rather than running across the beautiful black-soil plains of the Western Downs, but unfortunately that route got moved. For those of you who understand the Constitution, you will know that it's the state government that owns the railway lines, not the federal government. Unfortunately, we've been kind of kneecapped, and we've copped a lot of the blame for the alignment of the route. But, in typical Queensland Labor style, they're actually doing a reverse privatisation, where they're trying to flog off the railway land that they own to the federal government to get money. That's why they don't want to go down the Warwick route, which would require new land and buybacks that way. What they're doing is a reverse privatisation. We know the state Premier's got a lot of experience in that, because she privatised Queensland Rail, which is a great model; I love privatisation! Let's sell assets to generate income, spend it on one big inner-city project and destroy all our future revenue so we've got nothing to pay for future recurring expenses— Senator Patrick interjecting— Senator RENNICK 283596 Well, Senator Patrick, if you want to know the history of the Queensland government, it was the state Labor government that sold Golden Casket, which used to fund hospitals. They sold Queensland Rail. I think Senator Watt was in the government when they sold Queensland Rail. I think he's even on record admitting that was a big mistake. Don't worry, Senator Watt; I won't let you forget it anytime soon. What else did they sell? They sold the wind, solar and gas generators. They sold the Port of Brisbane for six times earnings. Why would you sell the Port of Brisbane for six times earnings? It was 99-year lease. They sold the forestry plantations for five times earnings, and not all that was leasehold; some of that was freehold. They literally gave away the assets, which was madness. Back to the Inland Rail, if we want to forward in Queensland and get it back on track, we need to build. Ultimately, if you went to a desert island, would you (a) go to a foreign bank and take out a loan or (b) build? If we want to get back on track in this country, we have to start building. We have to do what Lachlan Macquarie did in 1810, when he got here. For the first 17 years of the colony, we relied on foreign currency. We had a drought in 1805, and all of the foreign currency got repatriated. They started bartering and trading in rum. Of course, we all know what happens when you drink too much rum; it all ends up in a bit of a rum rebellion and all sorts of nasty things. Lachlan Macquarie was the first governor to see Australia as a country, not just a colony. He knew that every country needs its own currency, because that way you can issue sovereign credit against sovereign wealth. We have to look at an infrastructure bank. I'm just about to run off to meet the Treasurer—hopefully he doesn't stand me up again—to talk about getting an infrastructure bank going in this country, because we can match sovereign credit against sovereign wealth. A lot of people will tell you that you can't print money. Guess what? We're printing money now. We're printing $5 billion a week, but we're spending it. That will cause inflation, because, if you're printing and spending, you're going to increase demand. But guess what? If you print and build, you'll increase the supply of essential services. You'll provide more water. You can supply more power from power stations. You can provide better transport routes. Not only does that raise revenue for governments, which then means you've got fewer taxes going forward; it increases the supply of central services and it pushes down the cost of doing business. So it will make Australia much more competitive in trying to compete with other countries. If we want to bring back manufacturing in this country, we need to start building. That is the only way forward, and this inland rail is the perfect example. I'm agnostic. I'd basically go both ways: one to Gladstone, one to Brisbane. I'd prefer it to go via Warwick—just north of Warwick there—because Warwick is a great little town. I think it got shafted when they moved it up to going around the north part of Toowoomba, which just doesn't make sense. It's a big dogleg that adds 70 kilometres to the route. That is a great way to open up and, basically, tap into the all the wealth in this country. I'm speaking from the heart here: there's no better place do to that than in the Western Downs and the Maranoa, which is God's own country. I'll leave it there. I seek leave to continue my remarks later. Leave granted; debate adjourned. DOCUMENTS 78 DOCUMENTS Modern Manufacturing Initiative, COVID-19: Doherty Institute, Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling Program 78 Order for the Production of Documents 78 17:36 Senator RUSTON 243273 South Australia I table documents relating to orders of the Senate for the production of documents concerning the Modern Manufacturing Initiative, the Doherty institute modelling of Australia's COVID-19 response, and the Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling Program. Modern Manufacturing Initiative 78 Order for the Production of Documents 78 17:36 Senator WATT 245759 Queensland by leave—I move: That the Senate take note of the documents. Well, here we are again. It's deja vu. I feel like I only just spoke in this place about Minister Porter's failure to comply with Senate orders, and that's because I did only a couple of days ago. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 Senator Watt, could you confirm which document you are speaking to? Senator WATT 245759 The order to produce documents in relation to the Modern Manufacturing Initiative. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 Thank you very much. Senator WATT 245759 It's easy to get confused because there have been so many documents that we have sought from this government and been unsuccessful in having the government release. I understand the confusion as to which document I was referring to. It was only a couple of days ago that I was speaking about other documents that the opposition sought and that Minister Porter failed to provide, despite Senate orders requiring him to provide them. In anticipation that he would take exactly the same approach for this order to produce documents, I had this speech drafted and ready to go even before Mr Porter tabled his letter today. We could anticipate what his response would be because he, along with many other ministers in this government, has a pattern of refusing to comply with his obligations to this parliament. This gross dereliction of duty and brazen refusal to cooperate with systems of accountability and to accept responsibility are the defining hallmarks of the Morrison government. In this case, the opposition is again seeking information and answers from those opposite and is again being stonewalled. Again we've seen Senator Hanson and One Nation support the government in its attempts to bury information about how taxpayers' funds are being used and rorted by this government, just like One Nation did when the opposition sought to have documents about the government's corrupt car park rorts revealed. It's a worrying trend from One Nation. We've known for a long time that they vote with the government basically 90 per cent of the time, but it is a worrying trend that One Nation are happy to assist the government to bury information about how taxpayers' funds are being spent and rorted by this government. For someone who speaks about standing up for the public and about corruption in government as often as Senator Hanson does, gee, she seems to like voting with the government to assist them to commit the rorts and corruption that they engage in so frequently. This dance we have with the government—where we ask questions and they arrogantly step sideways to avoid giving answers—would almost be comical if it wasn't so damaging to our civil society. Frankly, it is a disgrace. It is a disgrace that the Morrison government has no respect for one of the greatest hallmarks of democracy—that is, accountability to the parliament. The Morrison government is allergic to accountability. The Prime Minister walks away from press conferences, dodges questions from journalists and obfuscates during question time. 'I don't hold a hose, mate'—he just doesn't take responsibility. He doesn't do a lot of things, frankly, and his ministers all know that they can follow suit with impunity. The question is: why? If there truly is nothing to see in the documents the opposition is seeking here and if every decision the government has made was based on sound advice and hard evidence—if every grant decision represents best value for money for the public, if every bathroom at a sports field is justified and if every car park in a Liberal marginal seat is required—then why the need for secrecy? Is it because there are even more colour-coded spreadsheets than those we know about? My order to produce documents in this case sought the release of the merit assessment packs and decision briefs provided to Minister Porter in relation to the translation and integration funding streams of the Morrison government's $1.3 billion Modern Manufacturing Initiative. It was a simple request and it should have been a simple answer. These documents we sought should have been close to hand and easily accessible. In fact, they should have been dog-eared from the close attention they have received from ministers as the sole evidence driving millions of dollars worth of investment by the taxpayer. Of course, that's if the process is working like it should, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks that good governance is occurring on this Prime Minister's watch. This Prime Minister won't even allow his embattled minister Christian Porter to choose who receives these funds. Instead, the $800 million that has been allocated for this program will be carved up by the Prime Minister. I'm sure the Audit Office are already drafting the terms of reference for that audit now. The role of the minister here is reduced to the one thing he is permitted to do—that's to stop us from finding out how decisions in his portfolio were made. I appreciate that that reality must be embarrassing for Minister Porter, but it doesn't excuse him from his responsibility to be accountable for the way taxpayer dollars are spent. In his letter denying this order Minister Porter claimed public interest immunity, something he has become very good at. The minister also claimed that this would unreasonably infringe on the privacy of individuals. It's not like the minister hasn't put down his coloured highlighters and picked up the black marker when providing documents to the Senate before. The final chestnut in the minister's response was: 'The documents informed, and were the subject of, Cabinet deliberations'—deliberations which the minister is hell-bent on keeping secret. This is just another blatant abuse of the protection afforded to ministers through cabinet. The only thing the Liberals stand for are themselves. They constantly stand in the way of accountability to the public. Community groups, businesses, entrepreneurs and industry must be assured that, when they dedicate their time and resources to making grant applications, the decisions to award funding are fair and merit based, not based on political motivations and self-interest. Absent this assurance, the efficacy of government programs is undermined and deserving applicants lose faith in the role of government. Rebuilding Australia's manufacturing capabilities on the other side of the pandemic is critical. For eight long years under this government, manufacturers have been neglected. Only now is the Morrison government recognising the important role they play in the Australian economy. But access to government support for Australian manufacturers should not be contingent on what is politically convenient for the Liberals. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and if Minister Porter is prepared to stand by his funding decisions then he must produce these documents. I seek leave to continue my remarks later. Leave granted; debate adjourned. Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling Program 79 Order for the Production of Documents 79 17:44 Senator WATERS 192970 Queensland by leave—I move: That the Senate take note of the document. I rise to take note of the ministerial statement that is essentially a soz-we-can't-comply-because-we-don't-want-to letter for the Senate's order to compel documents about the Beetaloo gas program. People will remember that this government dished out $21 million to a gas company, led by one of its Liberal Party donors, in order to frack gas in the Northern Territory, in the Beetaloo Basin, where the First Nations owners of that land have not consented. This whole thing stinks already. But we also learned that in fact the reason that Empire Energy—which is the said gas company, led by the said Liberal donor—got the first instalment of this taxpayer largesse to wreck the climate, against the wishes of traditional owners, was that they got a tip-off that it was a first-in best-dressed grant arrangement. So the Senate, at the Greens' initiative, asked for documents to discover who tipped them off, and when. Was it at one of the dinners that one of the relevant ministers had with Empire Energy when they did a site visit at the company's expense? Just how gross is this rorting of taxpayer dollars? The Senate passed that order for the production of a document. It has in fact compelled the government to provide documents that will establish just how many meetings were held between this company and the relevant ministers—Minister Taylor and Minister Pitt—and when those meetings occurred, and any documents that actually discuss who decided it was a first-come first-served arrangement. Was anybody told, or was just that company told? The Senate has already passed this order, and it has required the government to comply with it by 9.30 tomorrow morning. What the minister just tabled was nothing of the sort. It's a three-paragraph letter—and that's a generous interpretation; it's effectively only three sentences—saying, 'We need more time to comply with the order.' They haven't actually said how much more time they need, and I'm very suspicious that this isn't in fact a genuine indication of an intention to comply. I know this is not the part of the program where I can ask the minister questions, but I will put the minister on notice that I want to know: Are you intending on complying? When exactly are you going to be tabling these documents, which the Senate has compelled you to table? I understand there's quite a list there, and I understand there could well be some very juicy things that you wish wouldn't see the light of day. Perhaps it will take you a bit more time to compile them. Maybe you do have a whole stack of correspondence between Minister Taylor and the Liberal Party donor that wants to frack the Beetaloo Basin. Maybe there's a list of documents as long as your arm, but you cannot come in here and say that you just need more time, without specifying the date by which the government will comply with the order of the Senate. I'm flagging that I will seek leave to move a motion to specify a date for compliance, and I can come back to that at the end of my contribution. One also wonders if the difficulty that the government has in complying with this order for the production of a document is that it sacked so many of the public servants that do the good work that is meant to keep our democracy functioning. But that's just as an aside. So we want to know just how rorty this latest rort instalment is, and we want the documents to establish just how much favourable treatment has been given to this Liberal Party donor, who heads up a gas company that has just been given $21 million in taxpayer money to frack the Beetaloo Basin, to mine for methane gas—shale gas, to be precise, which we know is an enormously potent greenhouse gas. This is, of course, in the same week as we've had the IPCC warn us that we are going to hit an irreversible tipping point within a decade if we don't have better climate policies, and it comes off the back of the International Energy Agency and the G7 just a few weeks ago saying, 'You shouldn't have any new coal, oil or gas, and you certainly shouldn't be funding it with public money.' This is the backdrop against which we have this government, which is already embroiled in so many rorts it's actually hard to keep track of them, engaging in yet another rort and saying: 'Sorry, we need more time.' Either they want to disguise the dodginess that's happening, or there's so much evidence of it that they're going to need more time to get it all together. I am seeking leave to move a motion to require the government to comply with the disclosure requirements of this order for the production of a document, setting a new and very generous date of 23 August, which is, of course, the next sitting day after the original due date. Leave not granted. Senator WATERS 192970 Okay, well perhaps I'll just enumerate it again for you: just merely setting a fresh date— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 Leave was not granted, Senator Waters. An honourable senator interjecting— Senator WATERS 192970 I'm very happy for that to be given at this very time. I wasn't aware that it was possible, but— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 Senator Waters, let's try to move forward. We try to avoid conversations across the chamber. You sought leave to move a motion. Leave was denied. That concludes your contribution on this matter. Senator WATERS 192970 I seek leave to continue my remarks. Leave granted. Senator WATERS 192970 Thank you very much. I'm merely flagging again—because I suspect there might have been folk engaged in other activities, which is perfectly fine; that happens all the time in the chamber—that I will be lodging a motion requiring the government to comply with the order for the production of documents and setting a new, very generous date for compliance of 23 August, which is the first sitting day back, and I have no doubt that the opposition will support that, given that they supported the first order for the production of documents. So that was merely for clarification, given that there seemed to be some concern about a lack of understanding as to what that motion would contain. Hopefully, that confusion has now been resolved. I seek leave to continue my remarks later. Leave granted; debate adjourned. COVID-19: Doherty Institute 81 Order for the Production of Documents 81 17:52 Senator SIEWERT e5z Western Australia by leave—I move: That the Senate take note of the documents. I wish to take note of the government's response to Senate order for the production of documents No. 1208, which I moved yesterday and the Senate supported, seeking the full terms of reference, the full brief and the remit related to the Doherty institute modelling that informed the government's National Plan to transition Australia's National COVID-19 Response. I must say I'm not terribly shocked that the government didn't provide the actual information that the Senate passed a motion requiring the government to produce. The response includes a series of documents that I already have; it's nice to have another copy, but in fact where the substantive matters of interest are involved, the government is claiming public interest immunity—apparently, based on the well-established principle of cabinet confidentiality. Senator Patrick interjecting— Senator SIEWERT e5z And that's exactly the point I was just about to make, Senator Patrick: national cabinet does not have that confidentiality applied. So I think squat of the government's claim of public interest immunity. They try to hide behind this every single time. Whenever we try to get to the guts of the matter—in the COVID committee, for example—what happens? A public interest immunity claim! This is information that is extremely important. It's vital, in fact, for us to understand the nature of the government's response—why they've made the decisions they have made, in terms of these important issues. In this case, we want to know what were the terms of reference—the full brief—for the Doherty institute, because the government is ignoring the input of other organisations and other experts—for example, the Grattan Institute, whose modelling includes young people under the age of 16, whereas Doherty's doesn't. The government did ask Doherty for data on those that are eligible. What else did they ask Doherty for? What were the terms of reference? The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 Senator Siewert, please resume your seat. A point of order, Senator Ruston? Senator Ruston 243273 I was just wondering, Senator Siewert, if you could stop yelling. Your voice is actually hurting my ears. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 That is not a point of order. Senator Ruston 243273 I know, but please could you. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 Minister, please resume your seat. Senator SIEWERT e5z I will try to keep it a bit lower, but this is an issue that's extremely important, and, if the government keep wanting to run interference, those are just more signs that they don't want us to talk about this or to know what the full brief was, what the full remit was or what the terms of reference were for this inquiry. What the government refers us to, contained in the Doherty report, are some brief points about what that remit was. That is not good enough for the scrutiny that ought to and needs to be provided and undertaken, over the whole of the vaccine program and over decisions that are going to be made about the targets for vaccinations. I think it is extremely important that we understand the terms of reference for what is contained in the Doherty report. What is at stake here is not having the appropriate and right target. In the calculation of the target, if you go for 80 per cent of just the eligible population, that in fact relates to 65 per cent of the general population, and a lot more people will get sick and a lot more people will die, including young people, because the delta variant is much more infectious. As we know, and as I've articulated in this place on several occasions now, children are much more at risk from the delta variant. Young people are much more at risk from the delta variant. So it's critical that we include people under the age of 16 in the calculations of the target. It's critical Australians know what information is being used to decide those targets, when the government are relying on just one source of information, apparently—the Doherty institute report—for which they prescribed the terms of reference. I'm not having a go at the Doherty institute. What I want to find out is the specific terms of reference that the Doherty institute were asked to report on. What were the other parameters they were asked to report on? For example, to build a picture for people so they know, what was the calculation done on how infectious delta was as compared to the original variant and the alpha variant? Those sorts of things matter. That's why we sought and the Senate supported this OPD: to try and get access to this information so that we could understand what parameters the Doherty institute were specifically asked to model. Then we as a community could decide whether we think they were the right terms of reference and understand just what it means when the government decide they're picking particular targets and just how many people in the community will be at risk if we open up at 80 per cent—that is, 80 per cent of so-far-eligible people, because under-16-year-olds are not included, which, as I said, means that's actually a rate of 65 per cent. We need to understand this information. That's why I asked for and moved this OPD—to get access to that information. For the government to claim public interest immunity is an insult not only to this chamber, but also to the Australian people and the experts who want to fully consider the Doherty institute report in the context of what the government asked them specifically to model. 18:00 Senator PATRICK 144292 South Australia I also want to comment on the response to the OPD. I wasn't aware that the government had made a claim of public interest immunity that involved cabinet-in-confidence. I understand it has just been tabled. I want to point out that what the executive has done here is actually quite disturbing. I will refer the chamber to the matter of Patrick and Secretary, Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, AAT 2719, where a judicial officer, Justice White, has ruled that the national cabinet is not a cabinet. So far as I understand the Constitution, the executive is bound by these decisions. Of course, there has been a stay of order. The stay of order is to stop the effect of the decision, which is to hand over the document, not the decision itself. It's quite disturbing. We've had a situation where the executive has been claiming to the Senate that things are cabinet-in-confidence when they haven't been. I want to make it clear, the Senate doesn't necessarily accept that, just as the High Court hasn't accepted it. But now we have a slight change and it's a very disturbing change; that is—the government is not complying with a decision of a judicial officer. That is quite disturbing, very arrogant and a new step for this government. I seek leave to continue my remarks later. Leave granted; debate adjourned. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 There being no further contributions on ministerial statements, with the leave of the chamber, I will return to item 17. We had some technical challenges before. Senator Hanson wished to make a contribution on the management of the Inland Rail project. COMMITTEES 82 COMMITTEES Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee 82 Report 82 18:02 Senator HANSON BK6 Queensland [by video link] I got involved with the inland rail matter due to constituents contacting me with their concerns about it. I support the concept of the inland rail from the Melbourne port to the Brisbane port. However, the process conducted by ARTC and Inland Rail leaves a lot to be desired. The consultation conducted by ARTC and Inland Rail has been continually criticised by the public. They gave evidence that they were not consulted about or considered in respect of what impact the rail would have on their lives or the environment. It was only because of the committee that people felt they finally had a voice and that pressure was put on ARTC and Inland Rail to listen to communities. The committee has made reference to the cost blowout of the project that now stands at $14.5 billion. In addition to this, the project description dissection of the draft G2H EIS appears to provide some of the PPP costs—the public-private partnership—which includes all Queensland sections, including the border to Gowrie and the Kagaru to Acacia Ridge sections, which are not part of the PPP. The total construction is $3.3 billion. The approximately 24 per cent for indirect costs is approximately $792 million, and the total PPP cost is approximately $4 billion. Additional to these costs, which have not been calculated, are the anticipated costs of building tunnels and track from Acacia Ridge to the Port of Brisbane. Again, this is an additional cost in the vicinity of $2.8 billion, yet the ARTC claims it will using existing track. It has been determined that the inland rail trains have to unload and potentially reload to use an existing passenger line to the Port of Brisbane. This double handling of goods can only increase the time and cost of delivering goods to the Port of Brisbane. If product is not destined for the port, it would be transported by truck to various destinations from a highly congested terminal that is at its peak capacity at this present point in time. Therefore, why is the ARTC persistent in planning to have Acacia Ridge as the central point for the distribution centre for the cargo, whether that is to the port of Brisbane or other destinations? This is short-sighted and lacks foresight into the future, especially if we expect growth, and the whole concept of the ARTC is to promote growth. It will wither and die on the vine. I must reiterate that Acacia Ridge should not be used. People from the surrounding suburbs, estimated at 50,000 residents, have very strongly opposed the Inland Rail's destination being Acacia Ridge. Their concerns are based on noise pollution, vibration and congestion. This is not to be overlooked when evidence given stated that the number of trains a day could be approximately 38 or more. Additionally, these trains are initially 1.8-kilometres long, which puts them outside the Acacia Ridge terminal, regardless of the expectation to double the terminal's length in the future. If these trains intend to use the passenger train line to the port, the majority of their frequency must be during the night, which will further impact on residents. I must also add that the passenger line cannot take 1.8-kilometre trains that are double-stacked. It can't take the trains that are used on the Inland Rail, because of bridges, tunnels and curvature. It is pointless to have an inland rail line if it doesn't take advantage of loading or unloading produce or product in hubs throughout the inland rail route to enhance profits and pay for the building of the infrastructure. In my opinion, if we bypass making a firm decision now to build the line directly to Gladstone via Miles at a cost of approximately $3.5 billion, we will not do it in the future and a great opportunity will be lost. It will be a lost opportunity to create jobs, growth and opportunities in this rural community. Evidence given was very strongly in favour of the line to Gladstone, which would be utilised by coalmines in the area that indicated that they would start projects and create development and jobs if the line were made available to them. That potential will not be available with the line only going to Acacia Ridge. The port of Gladstone, which is capable of taking more ships than the port of Brisbane, is a lot more viable for the long-term growth, and the line would pay for itself in no time with the increased use of line. The port of Gladstone and the port of Brisbane are unanimous in the view that both ports could work together for mutual benefit and for the benefit of the nation. The proposed alternative routes from Toowoomba to the ports of Brisbane and Gladstone should be investigated to take into account my previous suggestion. The cost savings in not having to construct a 6.2-kilometre tunnel through the Toowoomba Range alone are estimated at approximately $6 billion, although the ARTC has not disclosed this costing, with the claim it is commercial-in-confidence. The plan to take the line via Millmerran to Toowoomba is not only a huge cost to the taxpayer in reclaiming land and established farms and infrastructure; there's also the stupidity of ignoring sound advice from locals and professional hydrologists with regard to major flooding issues across the black soil plains. The devastation the last flood left leaves no one in doubt about the damage flooding causes in the area. If the ARTC and the government insist on going solely via Toowoomba, a viable alternative route has been proposed across brownfields approximately six kilometres from the proposed line. That would not impact on residents, water flows or infrastructure, and the resulting cost reduction in construction would be massive and, hence, a saving to the taxpayer. This is a massive Australian infrastructure project that should result in Australian companies' participation, as well as an Australian workforce. The supply of steel as well as other materials, particularly in these economic times due to the pandemic, would ensure the ongoing viability of those Australian companies and Australians generally. However, it has come to my attention, as well as that of others, that, irrespective of the fact that Australian companies have designed various components of the line, the final contracts were not awarded to Australian companies but were, in fact, given to Chinese suppliers. One only has to look at the overall project-managing company, which is now totally controlled by its Chinese parent company, to realise why major supply contracts are now being sourced from China and not from preferred Australian companies that are ready, willing and able. So I ask the government: where is the benefit to Australia and Australians, particularly at this point in time? Throughout the inquiry we asked: who is in control and who makes the decisions? The ARTC told us it is the government that determines the planning, yet the government told us it's the ARTC. So, in fact, nobody knows who is in control. I say to the government and the bureaucrats: that this project costs nearly $20 billion and has no sound business case is a disgrace. If this is not to become a white elephant, the government must listen to the sound advice given to it by the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee, who listened to the concerns of ordinary Australians who do not oppose the Inland Rail. They want to see value for money and a viable, much-needed project that can only make our nation more prosperous. In my personal opinion, after being involved in the inquiry process, I don't have confidence in the design, the management, the minister or the government to deliver a profitable rail line that will see us well into the future and will hold up to the ever-changing technology and economy. For the money spent, this is a disgrace. BILLS 84 BILLS Customs Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021, Customs Tariff Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021 84

Customs Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021

Customs Tariff Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021

First Reading 84 18:11 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia I move: That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time. Question agreed to. Bills read a first time. Second Reading 84 18:11 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia I move: That these bills be now read a second time. I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. The speeches read as follows— CUSTOMS AMENDMENT (2022 HARMONIZED SYSTEM CHANGES) BILL 2021 SECOND READING SPEECH The Customs Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021 will amend the Customs Act 1901 to make consequential amendments resulting from the sixth review of the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (the Harmonized System). The Bill will amend the definition of 'tobacco products' in the Customs Act 1901 to include goods classified to a new tariff subheading for products such as e-cigarettes, that has been developed in the review of the Harmonized System. This amendment will ensure that goods classified to the new tariff subheading that contain tobacco will continue to be treated as tobacco products under the Customs Act. This will ensure that such goods remain subject to the same treatment as other imported products that contain tobacco. The amendments made by this Bill are consequential to the amendments that will be made to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 by the Customs Tariff Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021. CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (2022 HARMONIZED SYSTEM CHANGES) BILL 2021 SECOND READING SPEECH The Customs Tariff Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021 will amend the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to implement the changes agreed to in the sixth review of the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (the Harmonized System). The measures in this Bill will ensure that Australia's Customs Tariff, which is based on the Harmonized System, reflects the changing patterns of international trade, the emergence of new technologies and the international will to regulate certain goods of concern. The Harmonized System is a hierarchical system of four-digit and six-digit codes, legal notes and interpretative rules which enable the identification of any internationally traded good. The World Customs Organization developed the Harmonized System to strengthen and support trade between countries with different trade regulatory arrangements. Australia is one of almost 200 countries that use the Harmonized System. Australia's Customs Tariff Act 1995 (Customs Tariff Act) and the Australian Harmonized Export Commodity Classification implement the Harmonized System in Australia. These domestic instruments customise the structure of the Harmonized System to better identify goods that are of unique importance to Australia. Every five years, the World Customs Organization reviews the Harmonized System. The purpose of these reviews is to update the Harmonized System's tariff headings and subheadings to better reflect changing patterns of international trade, for example due to technological developments, changing volumes of trade, and the relative growth and decline in importance of certain goods. Australia was an active participant in the World Customs Organization's sixth review of the Harmonized System. Through this process, Australia secured several priority changes that will benefit Australian industry, such as the development of new tariff codes for placebos for clinical trials and virgin olive oil. The outcome of the review, accepted by World Customs Organization member countries in early 2020, makes approximately 350 amendments to the Harmonized System. Australia is committed to fulfilling its international obligation to implement these changes by 1 January 2022. The Harmonized System is of critical importance to Australian traders and industry. Ensuring that Australia's tariff is consistent with the international Harmonized System used by our trading partners is an important part of the Government's support for our importers and exporters. This Bill will make amendments to the legal notes and four-digit to eight-digit tariff codes in the Customs Tariff Act. It will remove tariff subheadings in Schedule 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, where the goods classified to these subheadings are no longer traded in sufficient volumes, such as, world globes and answering machines. The Bill will insert new tariff subheadings to reflect the development of certain new technologies, such as smartphones, drones and hybrid and electric vehicles. It will also insert new tariff subheadings to accommodate the increased trade of other goods, such as insect-based food products. Other proposed changes in the Bill will enable improved monitoring of the trade in particular goods. For example, the insertion of new seven-digit and eight-digit tariff subheadings and changes to the wording of Notes and Additional Notes in Schedule 3 will enhance international monitoring of the global trade in wood products, cultural articles and goods for use in e-cigarettes and vaping. Similar amendments will enable easier identification and monitoring of goods that are the subject of international agreements, such as synthetic diamonds, certain chemicals and dual use goods. The amendments proposed under this Bill will preserve existing rates of customs duty for the majority of goods. There are exceptions to this general approach for three categories of goods: flat panel display modules, semiconductor-based transducers and electronic waste and scrap. The Bill will simplify the tariff classifications of these three categories of goods, so they are no longer required to be imported under multiple tariff classifications that may have different rates of customs duty. Instead, each of these categories of goods will have new dedicated tariff subheadings and will apply a 'Free' rate of customs duty. Where there are changes to tariff subheadings in Schedule 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, this Bill will reflect such changes in relevant Schedule 4 concessional items. This approach will ensure that goods currently eligible for concessional treatment continue to be able to access a 'Free' rate of customs duty. Finally, the Bill will amend Schedules 4A to 13 of the Customs Tariff Act, to reflect the insertion of new subheadings in Schedule 3 that have a duty rate other than 'Free' under Australia's 14 established free trade agreements. To implement the changes made by the sixth review of the Harmonized System, the Government will also amend the Customs Act 1901 through the Customs Amendment (2022 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2021. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 5) Bill 2021 85

Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 5) Bill 2021

First Reading 85 18:12 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia I move: That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time. Question agreed to. Bill read a first time. Second Reading 85 18:13 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. The speech read as follows— TREASURY LAWS AMENDMENT (2021 MEASURES NO. 5) BILL 2021 Schedule 1 to the Bill increases the producer offset for films that are not feature films released in cinemas to 30 per cent of total qualifying Australian production expenditure, and to make various threshold and integrity amendments across the three screen tax offsets. This will ensure the Australian Screen Production Incentive tax offsets effectively target areas that require support and encourage production and commercial distribution of quality Australian screen content in a digital environment. The changes will also encourage the creation of productions that can compete on a global stage and unlock export opportunities. Schedule 2 to the Bill makes amendments in relation to small business insolvency. The main small business insolvency reforms, which came into effect on 1 January 2021, introduced new insolvency processes suitable for small businesses, reducing complexity, time and costs. These processes enable more Australian small businesses to quickly restructure. Where restructure is not possible, businesses can wind up faster, enabling greater returns for creditors and employees. This Bill makes consequential amendments which will support the operation of the new insolvency processes. Schedule 3 to the Bill contains a number of amendments to Treasury portfolio legislation to ensure that Treasury laws operate as intended. The amendments clarify legislation to ensure it operates in accordance with the policy intent, make minor policy changes to improve administrative outcomes or remedy unintended consequences, and correct technical or drafting defects. Full details of the measures are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 30484 In accordance with standing order 115(3), further consideration of this bill is now adjourned to 20 August 2021. Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 2) Bill 2021 86

Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 2) Bill 2021

First Reading 86 18:13 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia I move: That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time. Question agreed to. Bill read a first time. Second Reading 86 18:14 Senator REYNOLDS 250216 Western Australia I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. The speech read as follows— This Bill makes a number of changes to tax laws to implement reforms to the administration and oversight of organisations with deductible gift recipient (DGR) status and also deliver on the Morrison Government's commitment to amend Australia's Offshore Banking Unit regime to address concerns raised by the OECD's Forum on Harmful Tax Practices in 2018. Schedule 1 to the Bill amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (1997 tax law) to require non-government entities seeking endorsement as a DGR to be a charity registered with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission or be operated by a registered charity. Ancillary funds and specifically listed entities will be exempt from this requirement. The requirement to be a charity already applies to the majority of the general DGR categories in Subdivision 30-B of the 1997 tax law. This measure will amend the special conditions applying to the remaining general DGR categories, requiring non-government entities to maintain charity registration in order to retain their eligibility for DGR endorsement. The amendments include a 12 month transition period which will provide non-charity DGRs with the time to meet the requirements for charity registration without losing DGR status. Eligible DGRs may also have access to an additional three year transition period. This measure will improve the consistency of regulation, governance and oversight of DGRs, in turn helping to support continued confidence in the sector and public support for DGR entities. Schedule 2 to the Bill contains amendments to the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 that remove the preferential tax treatment provided for Offshore Banking Units (OBUs) and provide transitional arrangements for existing OBUs. The OBU regime is a concessional tax regime that can be used by the Australian financial services sector to provide banking services to offshore customers. The regime provides a concessional 10 per cent tax rate and an exemption from interest withholding tax for OBU activity. In October 2018, the OECD's Forum on Harmful Tax Practices found that Australia's OBU regime contains harmful features. As a result, the Treasurer announced on 26 October 2018 that the Government would seek to address these concerns. The OBU regime has been closed to new entrants since the Treasurer's announcement. Existing participants operating within the OBU regime will continue to access the concessional tax rate for a period of two years - up to the end of the 2022-23 income year. The Government will use this time to consult with industry on alternative measures to support the industry and ensure activity remains in Australia once the two year grandfathering period ends. Timely passage of this Bill will allow the OECD to confirm that Australia has amended the OBU regime to ensure that it is not a harmful tax practice. Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 87

Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021

Returned from the House of Representatives 87 COMMITTEES 87 COMMITTEES Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee 87 Reference 87 18:14 Senator PATRICK 144292 South Australia I move: (1) That the Senate notes that: (a) a former officer of the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS), known as Witness K, provided the Government of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste with an affidavit that contained information relating to an intelligence operation carried out by ASIS in Timor-Leste; (b) the Government of Timor-Leste stated in proceedings before the International Court of Justice that Witness K's affidavit 'describes the covert bugging in 2004 of the Timor-Leste Cabinet room on the instructions of the Australian authorities'; (c) the Australian Government informed the International Court of Justice that Witness K had served as an ASIS officer and that his affidavit contained information the disclosure of which would constitute an offence under section 39 of the Intelligence Services Act 2001; and (d) in the Australian Capital Territory Magistrates Court, on 18 June 2021, Witness K was convicted of an offence under section 39 of the Intelligence Services Act 2001. (2) That the following matters be referred to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee for inquiry and report by 21 October 2021: (a) was the intelligence operation disclosed in Witness K's affidavit an activity authorised by a Minister in accordance with the statute; (b) was the intelligence operation disclosed in Witness K's affidavit an activity authorised by the Director-General of ASIS in accordance with the statute; and (c) in respect to the authorisation under paragraph (a) or (b) what legal and policy related due diligence was carried out as part of the authorisation process. (3) That the Senate calls on the Australian Government, including the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Director-General of ASIS and the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, to cooperate fully with the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee inquiry. (4) That the Senate further calls on the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Alexander Downer AC, and the former Directors-General of ASIS, Mr David Irvine AO and Mr Nick Warner AO, to cooperate fully with the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee inquiry. Notice of motion altered on 23 June 2021 pursuant to standing order 77 This is a really important inquiry referral, but before I go to the details of the referral I need to give some background. This is an important matter that goes back decades. It basically relates to Australia trying to get access to oil and gas in waters where typically we would not otherwise have an entitlement. It goes back to negotiations with Indonesia where Australia negotiated a boundary with Indonesia that wasn't on the median line and, in doing so, managed to gain access to additional resources, so we got a much greater economic exclusion zone from which to potentially extract resources. Timor, which is straddled on both sides by Indonesia, was a Portuguese colony, and the Portuguese were not going to agree to such a term. That created a situation where we had what was called the Timor Gap. At some point in time the Timorese decided, 'Well, we want to become independent.' The Australian government had a different view, at least externally talking about the fact that Timor wasn't able to look after itself and that the best option would be for Indonesia to consume Timor from the Portuguese. We know that back in 1975 there was an invasion. Indonesia invaded East Timor. Sadly, five journalists got killed—the Balibo Five—in that operation, murdered by Indonesian military officers. Hundreds of thousands of Timorese died in a conflict with Indonesia. Again, I'll just go back and say that the motive for Australia—because Australia was an ally; we were the only ones that wanted to support Indonesia in its annexation of Timor—was that we had our eye on the oil underneath the Timor Sea. We wanted to close the gap on either side of Timor, consistent with the Indonesian treaty that we had, such that we would get access to oil. It didn't happen. In 1999 independence was granted, not formally but through a vote. There were lots of terrible attacks on the Timorese, and the Australian Defence Force got involved and basically assisted INTERFET—and good on them, our armed forces assisting Timor. But of course that worried people back in this building, and in particular it worried people like Mr Alexander Downer, who was the foreign minister at the time. He could see the repercussions of this in that they would have to start negotiations with the Timorese, and the Timorese were not likely to be inclined to adopt the median line, which was the case in international law. In order to pre-empt the difficulties there, in March 2002 Australia withdrew itself from the jurisdiction of the ICJ in relation to maritime boundaries. We stepped away from our normally very strong position of an international rules based order and withdrew ourselves from the jurisdiction of both the ICJ and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. An honourable senator interjecting— Senator PATRICK 144292 I'm getting an interjection that Iraq is of a similar view to Australia, but I don't know the full story there. But we withdrew ourselves from the jurisdiction, and then we started to issue exploration licences. This was all in the lead-up to, essentially, what needed to happen, which was a treaty negotiation. That leads us to what we now know as the famous bugging of the Timorese cabinet rooms. As the Timorese were sitting down to chat—they were going to negotiate with Australia back in October 2004. The Timorese were discussing exactly what their position was. Unbeknownst to them, ASIS had bugged their cabinet room. Am I revealing something that is outrageous and will harm our relationship with East Timor? The answer is no, because in actual fact anyone who wants to go and look at the memorial of Timor-Leste that was filed in the International Court of Justice—it's very clear that the Timorese are absolutely of that view. They filed in strong belief that ASIS had bugged their cabinet room. We had listened to the bottom line of what the Timorese were willing to do and then we proceeded to close off on the negotiation. Of course, Timor came out the worst for it. People might say that countries spy all the time. I accept that we might monitor other countries to make sure that the government is stable, that there's nothing harmful that's going to happen to Australia. I accept that. That's what happens. That's no secret as well. We have an Intelligence Services Act that actually spells out some of the ways our intelligence-gathering operations are to be conducted. It's no secret that we do it. The difference here is that we went into good faith negotiations with Timor-Leste. We shook their hands and said, 'We are going to negotiate with you fairly and try and get a good outcome,' whilst spying on them. At the time Timor was the newest country in the world and one of the most impoverished countries in the world. But you know what? You don't want to stand between Australia and an oil field, no matter how much moral fortitude you have to break down. We ended up in a situation where we did the spying. We were taken to the Permanent Court of Arbitration. That was a confidential arbitration. Timor went there and said, 'We have to cancel this treaty. It wasn't negotiated in good faith.' Part way along the way, and the reason we know of those proceedings, the Australian government decided they didn't really want to play fair in the justice system, and they raided the office of the attorney for East Timor, which was Bernard Collaery. They took all their legal documents. That then got sent to the International Court of Justice. The International Court of Justice ruled against Australia and ordered Australia to hand back the legal documents of East Timor. That's where we understood what events were taking place in the Permanent Court of Arbitration, because that needed to be disclosed so that people could understand the context of why Australia had raided the offices of Timor-Leste's lawyers. We haven't behaved well in any of this. There's no silver lining here. There's nothing good that we can say about Australia's conduct towards East Timor over the last three or four decades. Remember that Timor is a neighbour of ours. Timor will always be a neighbour of ours geographically. It's not going to move. We want them to be our friend. We've got to recognise that in World War II 40,000 Timorese died helping Australian servicemen, and that's the disgraceful thing about what has happened in relation to our attempts to get access to oil. That's the backdrop. That's the story. Moving to the proposal around the inquiry, I think this parliament, this Senate, ought to look at the approvals for this particular operation that did take place. You don't have a court hearing down the road at the ACT Supreme Court for a fictitious operation. There's no question that this occurred. We need to understand how it was authorised, and we need to understand that because it is this parliament that sets the rules on how these operations are authorised. It's spelt out in the Intelligence Services Act. It would appear—actually, I can't understand it, because I don't know the details. That's the point of the inquiry: we want to look at how that operation was actually authorised, because I can't imagine, if it had been properly considered, that anyone would have ticked off on that. My understanding is that, in the confidential briefs in the courts dealing with the Collaery matter, there is no authorisation in those files. There's no written authorisation, which is what is required by law. We might end up with Bernard Collaery, who's been persecuted for blowing the whistle on this, walking free of the court—I hope he does; the trial should never have taken place in the first place—because, if indeed it was found that he revealed an operation, he would have revealed an unlawful operation. I don't think you can get charged for that. We do need to look at this. This is really important. What happened as a result of this indiscretion, this awful, abhorrent conduct of Australia, is that we've put our neighbour offside. I know this because I went up there as part of a delegation and met with a bunch of Timorese people who feel quite annoyed at Australia, and understandably so. The revenue we took from the fields that we had access to as a result of the 2006 CMATS Treaty was about $5 billion. We returned something of the order of $1.4 billion, I think, to the Timorese. This is a robbery of $3½ billion. You can understand what that could have done for the livelihoods of the Timorese—impoverished and struggling. I've been up there, and I've seen the result of our actions. I've seen the Chinese building freeways on the southern plateau. I've seen the Chinese building powerlines. I've seen the port that the Chinese are building. If I were Timorese, I would look and say: 'Do you know what? Australia has never helped us, despite our assistance back in World War II, where we helped Australian troops. The gratitude was never repaid.' Part of the problem here is that we simply won't even admit what we've done. That's a truly disturbing set of circumstances. I refer people to the terms of reference. They simply look to say: 'How was this operation authorised? Was it authorised in accordance with law?' I know Labor were considering supporting this if it went to the PJCIS. Unfortunately, the PJCIS is a committee established by statute, and the statute prohibits the examination of operations, so we can't send it to the PJCIS—as opposed to this referral, which goes to a committee of the Senate that is established by the Senate itself. It's not fettered in its ability to conduct this inquiry, and there's no reason the inquiry can't be conducted in camera as necessary. Of course, we always like to have these sorts of things dealt with openly, but, if necessary, we could go in camera and get to the bottom of what happened. This is a very important issue. It's important to make sure that the Australian government has complied with the commands of the parliament in respect of collecting intelligence overseas, but we also need to understand how we got into this situation where we've done such a terrible thing to Timor-Leste. 18:29 Senator McKIM JKM Tasmania This motion relates to the bugging by ASIS of the Timor-Leste cabinet deliberations during treaty negotiations in 2004 between the Australian government and the government of Timor-Leste. Let's be very clear: this bugging was conducted specifically to give Australia an unfair advantage during those negotiations, and, as it transpired, we did get an unfair advantage during those negotiations. That unfair advantage that was achieved by the blatant cheating tactic of bugging the Timor-Leste cabinet decisions ended up in the theft of billions of dollars by Australia from one of our closest geographic neighbours, in Timor-Leste, one of the most economically disadvantaged countries in the world and one of the newest countries in the world—a country that could have well used those billions of dollars to provide better health outcomes for its people and to build resilient infrastructure for its people, but who we ripped off shamelessly and mercilessly for our own commercial advantage. And I will argue later in this speech that there were other advantages gained by Australia and Australians as well as commercial advantages. As Senator Patrick said, many of the people of Timor-Leste have suffered so badly. Historically, so many of their ancestors actually fought and died for Australia and in Australia's interests in wars in the last century. The fact that we would have acted towards them with such utter bastardry is one of the more shameful chapters in our country's story. There have been many shameful chapters in Australia's story, from colonisation and invasion of Europeans, through the stolen generations, a range of other terrible occurrences and, more recently, the way we've treated refugees and people seeking asylum, but this disgrace sits very comfortably in that list of shameful chapters in our country's story. There is very little doubt in my mind that the instigation and parts of the commission of the bugging of the Timor-Leste cabinet deliberations by the Australian government were unlawful under Australian law, and those matters should be tested—I accept that—and the motion proposed by Senator Patrick would assist with the testing of that assertion. We should also be able to hear from people like Mr Downer, Mr Irvine and Mr Warner, and the inquiry proposed by Senator Patrick in the motion we are currently debating would also assist with hearing from those people. They could help us shine some light on what happened back when that bugging was authorised and allow us to shine a little bit of the disinfectant of sunlight on those events. I want to make it clear that what I'm about to say next is no adverse reflection on the terms of this motion or its proposer. I completely understand what Senator Patrick is attempting to achieve here and I totally support him in that. But there are other matters relating to those treaty negotiations that also deserve a fuller inquiry and more investigation, and I would argue that, in the absence of the government taking those steps, it would be appropriate for the Senate to consider those matters. Certainly, the surveillance of the Timor-Leste government during negotiations should be considered, and these terms would assist in that. Other matters that deserve scrutiny include the relationships between the Australian government and the corporate interests which benefited from the terms of the treaty and benefited from agreements and contracts associated with the treaty, and that is particularly in regard to the helium that was under the Timor strait— Senator Patrick interjecting— Senator McKIM JKM And I'll take Senator Patrick's interjection—'just an inert gas', he says. I suspect he knows as well as I do that helium is an incredibly important strategic element for Australia. Time won't permit me to go into the full ins and outs of the way helium was, and wasn't, covered by that treaty. But those are certainly matters that deserve further inquiry, as do the actions of the Australian government in cases relevant to the treaty in international tribunals and courts, including those in the International Court of Justice which are referred to in Senator Patrick's motion. We also need to better understand whether the terms of the treaty aligned with Australia's strategic and economic interests. I think that goes to matters including the way helium was, and wasn't, dealt with by this treaty and also to other matters such as the relationships between people who were involved in senior Australian government positions at the time, including Mr Downer, and the corporate interests that profited so massively from the terms of this treaty. Another matter which needs to be further understood is, in fact, the decision of the Australian government to charge Mr Bernard Collaery and Witness K under the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 and the circumstances around that, because—and I've made this point previously to this chamber—there is just no chance that that was a decision made in the public interest; that was a political decision. That decision to charge Mr Collaery and Witness K had to be made by the Attorney-General. And, in the public interest, the Attorney-General should have decided not to charge Mr Collaery and not to charge Witness K because, in fact, Bernard Collaery and Witness K are Australian patriots of the highest order. We should have stamped some medals for them, not charged them under laws that relate to Australia's national security. This has been a sordid and disgraceful chapter from start to finish. I genuinely believe that, if the truth came out, careers and reputations would be destroyed or, at the very least, highly compromised, but that is not a reason for the truth not to come out. We owe it not just to the people of Timor-Leste and the Timor-Leste government but also to the Australian people to inquire into the truth of these matters because the truth is important. Whether or not the bugging of the Timor-Leste cabinet deliberations was lawful under Australian law is absolutely critical because it is in the public interest that the Australian people have confidence in the intelligence agencies that are created and overseen by this parliament— An honourable senator interjecting— Senator McKIM JKM I will take that interjection as well: overseen in a very marginal way by this parliament and certainly, operationally, overseen to nowhere near the extent that they should be by this parliament. And I make the point that the PJCIS—which, I understand, was Labor's preferred committee for this inquiry—not only is unable to conduct it under the terms Senator Patrick has outlined but is also a closed shop, peopled only by senators and MPs representing the major parties in this place. The crossbench is explicitly ruled out of the people who can make up that committee. I won't go into the history, but there has been at least one exception to that. Let's be clear about what this inquiry would allow us to do. It would allow us to advance our understanding of what went on at that time—of what went on in 2004, when we colluded to steal and conspired to steal from one of our closest neighbours and one of the poorer countries in the world. And it is not only we as a country who benefited financially from that; I suspect there was significant personal benefit for some of the players. Those matters ought to be inquired into, and they ought to be able to be understood. For those reasons and many, many more, the Australian Greens will be supporting the motion put forward by Senator Patrick. 18:41 Senator GALLAGHER ING Australian Capital Territory Labor is not going to support this motion. We're not in a position to support the proposed inquiry at this time. We agree that these are significant issues and they do need to be examined, but we do not believe an inquiry by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee is the appropriate way to examine these issues. As Senator Patrick's motion identifies, there are unresolved questions relating to the intelligence operation in question and to the decision of the former Attorney-General, Mr Porter, to authorise the prosecution of Witness K and Mr Collaery. In considering Senator Patrick's proposed reference, Labor investigated the possibility of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, the PJCIS, conducting an inquiry in the same terms as Senator Patrick has proposed. Unfortunately, that is not possible due to the limitations of the scope of the committee's inquiry powers under the Intelligence Services Act 2001. The provisions of section 29(3) of the Intelligence Services Act mean that the PJCIS is unable to review particular operations that have been undertaken by ASIS or an aspect of the activities of ASIS that does not affect an Australian person, or to conduct inquiries into individual complaints about the activities of ASIS. Labor believes the Intelligence Services Act 2001 should be amended to implement the recommendations of the 2017 Independent Intelligence Review in so far as they relate to the oversight and evaluation arrangements of the Australian intelligence community. In particular, the Intelligence and Security Legislation Amendment (Implementing Independent Intelligence Review) Bill 2020, introduced by Senator McAllister, would enact recommendation 23 of the 2017 review. That recommendation was that the role of the PJCIS be expanded by amending relevant legislation to include a provision enabling it to request the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security to conduct an inquiry into the legality and propriety of particular operational activities of the national intelligence community agencies and to provide a report to the PJCIS, the Prime Minister and the responsible minister. This bill follows the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security Amendment Bill 2015, developed by former senator John Faulkner and introduced by Senator Wong, which also proposed a series of amendments to improve the operation of the committee and to ensure that the adequacy and effectiveness of parliamentary oversight of intelligence and security agencies kept pace with the agency's powers. The inability for this matter to be referred to the PJCIS demonstrates again the need for the Intelligence Services Act 2001 to be amended, which Labor will do in government. In relation to comments made by Senator McKim that the crossbench are specifically excluded from the PJCIS, I would like to inform the chamber that the arrangements and the appointments to that committee are completely within the control of the Prime Minister, who nominates and appoints House of Representatives members, and the Leader of the Government in the Senate, who nominates and appoints senators. I'm advised that, during Labor's last term in government, Mr Wilkie actually sat on the committee. So just to be clear: it's not a big conspiracy to exclude the crossbench and in fact the legislation doesn't require that, but it is the government's view, at this point in time, that the crossbench would not be invited to sit on that committee. In government, Labor will amend the Intelligence Services Act for this matter to be referred to the PJCIS. In government, we will ensure an inquiry into the circumstances of the intelligence operation conducted by the Australian Secret Intelligence Service in Timor-Leste and the subsequent decision to prosecute Witness K and his lawyer, Mr Bernard Collaery. Further, Labor call on the Attorney-General to provide an explanation to the Senate of the public interest in continuing to prosecute Mr Collaery. For reasons that have not been publicly explained, Mr Morrison's former Attorney-General, Mr Porter, personally authorised the prosecution of Witness K and Mr Collaery. This is despite Mr Porter's predecessor, Mr Brandis QC, declining to provide that authorisation. Labor have been calling for Mr Porter to explain why he suddenly authorised these prosecutions, given the charges relate to events alleged to have occurred in 2004 and may have involved senior members of the Howard government. To date, neither Mr Porter nor his successor as Attorney-General, Senator Cash, have provided the public with an explanation for a decision to authorise the prosecutions or explained how the public interest is served by them. Labor is also concerned by reports that Mr Porter instructed his lawyers to intervene in the pre-trial proceedings against Mr Collaery on multiple occasions in order to press the court to cast a greater cloak of secrecy over the trial. This has reportedly led to considerable further delay and cost and, in doing so, increased the stress and financial hardship faced by the accused. Under questioning from Labor in May this year, the Morrison government conceded that it had already spent over $4 million on these two prosecutions, even though they have still not progressed to the trial stage. Labor is also aware that both Mr Collaery and Witness K claim to be whistleblowers. More generally, the Attorney-General's unexplained decision to prosecute Witness K and Mr Collaery and the attempts to have the trial of Mr Collaery conducted in secret appear to be part of a broader shift towards more secrecy and less accountability in government. That shift began with the election of the Abbott government and has escalated rapidly under Prime Minister Morrison, who, despite multiple scandals on his watch, has never held any of his ministers to account. For these reasons it is more important than ever that Mr Porter's replacement as Attorney-General, Senator Cash, provide a detailed explanation as to why the ongoing prosecution of Mr Collaery is in the public interest. 18:47 Senator WHISH-WILSON 195565 Tasmania I agree with a lot of what Senator Gallagher said there. It is quite intriguing why the government won't support this motion based on what they have said here tonight. I won't go over old ground, but I want to pay my respects to Senator Patrick for bringing this forward and to Senator McKim for the work he has done on this over many years. I just want to highlight the particular point that Witness K, the ex-ASIS officer who through internal avenues blew the whistle on what he obviously thought was immoral or potentially criminal behaviour, did that when former minister Alexander Downer joined Woodside Petroleum. That's a really important point to make. That is what triggered this intelligence officer to come forward with these concerns. It triggered the whole process that we are discussing here today. It hasn't skipped my attention either that Senator Brandis, who many of us who have been here for a while were very familiar with from his time in this chamber, refused to sign off on the prosecution of Bernard Collaery and Witness K. As soon as he was gone, Mr Christian Porter, in the other place, signed off on it. Also, he was previously legal counsel for Woodside Petroleum. Is there a pattern to this? Should we be joining the dots? Why the cover-up? Why the silence? Why the lack of transparency? Why the abuse of power—because that's what this is? This is using the resources of government from one of the highest offices of the land to cover up an event that occurred over a decade ago that clearly implicates illegal behaviour, potential criminality, certainly immoral and unethical behaviour in the eyes of many people—and probably a whole lot more. I would like to particularly say that abuses of power need scrutiny. This is an opportunity, through the legal and cons committee, to scrutinise this. Asking Mr Christian Porter to make a statement we all know is not about to fly. This is just a salve by the Labor Party. Two weeks ago, Senator Patrick put this reference on the table that we're debating tonight, and I know there are some good people in the Labor Party who support this. It's just so disappointing that clearly they're not supporting this because they are too close to the intelligence community. They're clearly either too close or too afraid. They're lacking courage to have scrutiny of the institution of parliament to which we've been democratically elected to represent the Australian people. It's very disappointing. It's clear that the relentless hounding of Bernard Collaery, a man of upstanding achievement and history and experience and who's held in significant gravitas by this country, has been designed to send a message. The relentless hounding of these two men, who, as Senator McKim so rightly said, should have been given a medal for exposing what they have exposed, is designed to send a message: Don't blow the whistle. Don't embarrass powerful people, or we will come after you with everything we have got. We're also seeing it in the case of David McBride for blowing the whistle on the allegations that ultimately led to the Afghan war inquiry, which is playing out partly through the courts at the moment. And we've most certainly seen it in relation to Chelsea Manning overseas, and the brave man Julian Assange and organisation WikiLeaks, who published these disclosures that so embarrassed powerful people in the US and here in Australia. At 10.30 am London time tomorrow, on 11 August, the UK High Court will hear the appeal of the Biden administration into the extradition trial of Australian publisher—and hero to many people, including myself—Julian Assange. It is an absolute travesty that Assange is still in jail. He's never been charged with any crime. It's purely to send a message: don't disclose our dirty secrets, our dirty laundry, or we will come after you with everything we have got. The parliamentary friends of Assange group have sought to have a media pass so we can watch the proceedings of that High Court case in the UK live, and I think that's a great thing. Those members of the group will have the ability to watch that live on the internet, and I'm very encouraged at the number of senators that have come forward from the Labor Party to join the parliamentary friends of Assange group. As Julian Assange often says, courage is contagious, and it's good to see more people joining that group and getting involved. I understand there's even a Liberal Party MP that's finally joined the group. The local member, from where I live in Launceston, Bridget Archer is a member of the parliamentary friends of Assange group, but I know there are other members and senators who would like to be a part of that group. Nevertheless, that is tomorrow. I hope that the High Court doesn't uphold the appeal when it ultimately gets to the substantive case in a few months time and that this Australian, who's essentially been in hard lockdown now for nearly 11 years, gets to walk free and that we get a very powerful message that press freedom is important and whistleblowing is important. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 264449 The question is that the motion moved by Senator Patrick be agreed to.

The Senate divided. [18:59]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Chandler)

8 AYES Hanson-Young, SC Lambie, J McKim, NJ Patrick, RL (teller) Roberts, M Siewert, R Waters, LJ Whish-Wilson, PS 23 NOES Askew, W Brockman, S Canavan, MJ Chandler, C Davey, P Duniam, J Gallagher, KR Hughes, H McGrath, J McMahon, S O'Sullivan, MA Paterson, J Pratt, LC Reynolds, L Ruston, A Scarr, P Seselja, Z Small, B Smith, DA Stoker, AJ Urquhart, AE (teller) Van, D Wong, P 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 93 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Closing the Gap 93 19:01 Senator URQUHART 231199 Tasmania In 2007, the Council of Australian Governments committed to closing the gap in life expectancy between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and non-Indigenous Australians. In 2008, during his apology to Indigenous Australians, then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd promised to deliver a report card each year on the government's efforts to close the gap. For over a decade now we have sat in this place listening to report after report, speech after speech, from government after government. And as we listen, risking becoming numbed by statistics and disconnected from the reality of the human lives they represent, around us in this building over 2,500 clocks are ticking out the time, letting us know as each hour passes that we still have not turned the tide on Indigenous disadvantage, reminding us that a nation not yet reconciled isn't truly whole and reminding us that, for eight long years, Liberal coalition governments have kicked the can down the road on responsibility for and progress on closing the gap. Last week, Prime Minister Morrison delivered the latest iteration of this report. Sadly and disturbingly, the data shows that massive disadvantage remains and that on many of the targets there has been no substantial change. For so many First Australians, life is deprived, frightening and unjust. They are still far more likely to be jailed, far more likely to die by suicide and far more likely to have their children removed than non-Indigenous Australians. Out of the 17 targets, only three are on track. As my colleague in the other place Linda Burney pointed out: even if the adult incarceration goal were to be met, the rate would still be more than 11 times higher than that of the non-Indigenous population; even if the youth incarceration goal of a reduction of 30 per cent by 2031 were to be met, the rate would still be more than 12 times higher than for the non-Indigenous population; and, even if the out-of-home-care goal of a 45 per cent reduction by 2031 were to be met, the rate would still be five times higher than for the non-Indigenous population. This year, Mr Morrison presented the parliament with a new agreement: the National Agreement on Closing the Gap, a full and genuine partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in making policies to close the gap. It is a welcome step, but should it really have taken eight long years to work that out? Lasting change will only stem from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people having a genuine say in the policies that affect them, a voice that will help to finally end what the Uluru Statement from the Heart describes as 'the torment of our powerlessness'. In north-west Tasmania, we have a wonderful organisation called No. 34 Aboriginal Health Service. They encourage their community to achieve better health outcomes by offering a wide range of medical, support and referral services, as well as programs to improve health and wellbeing and promote connection to country, culture and community. They look to reduce the barriers for clients to access medical care, and to facilitate pathways that are culturally safe and easy to engage with. At one of their events I attended recently, we were invited to watch a film made by Arts Health Agency in collaboration with No. 34 staff and clients—one of a number of projects that they had made together since the first COVID-19 lockdowns. Part of its strategy was to maintain connections through art-making, story-telling and the sharing of knowledge. The film project was made with the women's group narta sista, most of whom live with chronic health conditions. It explores their deep connections with each other and how a health service supports their social and emotional wellbeing. It looks at the present and the past. It looks at the way the removal of children by white authorities, as well as other racist policies, divided families and still does to this day—how these policies separated whole communities, so sisters, aunties and cousins would cross the street and not acknowledge one another because one was whiter than the other. The film is also a conversation about what the women are learning from each other and what kind of 'old' they want to be in the future. What does cultural care look like as we age? I want to thank narta sista for their generosity in sharing their stories. I felt deeply honoured to hear them. The film strengthens their solidarity and resilience, and the women of narta sista are proud of their achievement. The film is part of their voice and their truth. They have the power to decide how, when and even if to share their stories. That power is incredibly important, because only they fully understand the torment of the powerless, which they have known. There are many good and healing stories in places like No. 34, and there are other signs of hope. The Liberal Premier of Tasmania has recently appointed Tasmania's former Governor Kate Warner and law professor Tim McCormack to lead talks with the state's Aboriginal community in an effort to find a path to reconciliation and a treaty. If the Liberal Premier of Tasmania can do that, then I dream that I might one day hear the words 'voice, treaty and truth' uttered by a majority of those on the other side of this chamber. Honestly, it baffles me why a request to consult people on matters that affect them is seen by some here as such a big ask. It was a grave disappointment to hear the Prime Minister last week rule out the First Nations voice to parliament before the next election. Voice means First Nations people having a say in decisions, policies and laws that affect them. After centuries of violence, theft and dispossession, isn't that the least that we can get sorted—not a third chamber of parliament but a mechanism safely enshrined in our Constitution: a place to talk and a place to listen, a place that cannot be swept away every time the political tide turns? Voice, truth and treaty—First Nations people have asked for these things, demonstrating an extraordinary patience, a patience that Linda Burney describes as so great that it counts as an expression of profound generosity. Most of my colleagues know that I'm a pretty impatient person. Once I can see that something needs doing, I can't see the logic in delay. As I walk around this parliament building, its walls adorned with so many breathtaking works of Aboriginal art, as well as those 2,500 clocks, which seem to be ticking louder than ever, it feels as though time is slipping away. But sharing stories and truth takes time—healing takes time—because there is so much to find out. A makarrata, a coming together after a struggle, is a beautiful concept that a Labor government will make real. An Albanese Labor government will establish an independent makarrata commission as a priority, to oversee processes for treaty-making and truth-telling. It will also work with a constitutionally enshrined voice to parliament. Closing the gap requires tangible action, which Labor will deliver, such as: doubling the number of Indigenous rangers; setting a target to increase First Nations employment in the Australian Public Service to five per cent; supporting the good work of many of Australia's largest employers to increase the rate of First Nations employment; improving access to training and apprenticeships for First Nations people; addressing the market in fake art, which robs many First Nations artists of income; supporting growth for Indigenous owned businesses in domestic and international trade; reaffirming the importance of Indigenous rights in future international trade agreements; and providing an additional $10 million each year for Indigenous protected areas. Listening to and empowering First Nations people will be at the very core of our approach to closing the gap and reconciliation. Australia needs a government that will deliver the Uluru statement in full—voice, treaty and truth. Only a Labor government will make that happen. 19:11 Senator O'NEILL 140651 New South Wales Having had the benefit this morning of sitting in the chair—as you are right now, Acting Deputy President Chandler—and hearing the contributions on this very important debate, I was forced to cast my mind back to 2013, when I first came to this chamber, and my first speech in this place. In it I indicated that one of the things that concerned me was that the Closing the Gap statement, which was an historic event of 2007 and was replicated every year in the House, was actually not marked here in the Senate. I make this observation because it is several years down the track—2013 through to now—and today is, in fact, the first day that we are having a time-unlimited debate on the Closing the Gap statement. It's not February—we've changed so much, and here we are in August—but this will be an annual examination of the conscience of the nation. I use those words as a person of the Catholic faith who has that thing called the sacrament of confession. That's unfamiliar to many people, but it gives me a language to talk about the concept of reviewing and thinking about what is right action and what is good action. The question for us is: What is appropriate action? What is right and good action for the people of this country with regard to our First Nations? This morning, Senator Siewert made a contribution, and she acknowledged the Lowitja Institute. She spoke about Lowitja indicating that there are ways of knowing, ways of doing and ways of being. That is the journey that we need to undertake as Australian people—to understand the ways of knowing of the First Nations peoples, the ways of being of the First Nations peoples and the ways of doing of the First Nations peoples—because God knows when we got here, at colonisation, we didn't look for the wisdom of a nation; we declared its absence. Indeed, Senator Dodson, in his contribution this morning, spoke about the challenges that face us, even with these years and years of recognition under the Closing the Gap mantle. He spoke about the fanfare around the announcement, just last week, of implementation plans. He spoke about the first target, prescribing a 15 per cent increase in Aboriginal landmass to Indigenous rights and interests and a 15 per cent increase in their rights or interests in the sea, but he spoke about the incapacity to actually even agree on those targets in recent days. We can't do that. He said that the meeting agreed to defer, and I loved the expression of hope that he gave this morning that things can still be resolved. He said: … I hope that goodwill will prevail. But this demonstrates the perennial challenge of negotiating at a table which rests on the unresolved legacy of terra nullius and the denied sovereignty of First Nations peoples. There is the heart of the challenge we face. We are making some progress. I note the difference in terms of how we acknowledge country and how that's happening in schools and at places where we gather around the country. But, in the same way that we need to make that an authentic gesture of acknowledgement—that the First Nations people are our First Nations—we need also to make sure that this annual report is not simply a box-ticking exercise. We need to guard against it becoming a pointless ceremony on which we should drop a few meagre words here and there. Of all the ministerial statements we review, this has primacy above all, in my view, given the outrageous realities of disadvantage that prevail after all these years of colonisation in our country. For ordinary Australians, five out of 1,000 children might be removed from their home. But for First Nations people, in 2021, 56 out of 1,000 children will be removed. I'm heartened by the acknowledgement of the suffering of the stolen generation, but it's not just one generation that has been removed. We're talking about 56 out of a thousand First Nations children being removed from their home today. This is an enormous challenge for us to face, and we need to make great changes to our policies to address that. I want to acknowledge the contribution of Senator Bridget McKenzie, who spoke about education and its impact. Of all the things she said, I want to particularly note that she indicated that we need to close the gap at the beginning of life. I can only endorse that. I also want to acknowledge the contribution of one of the few speakers from the government who have come out today, and that is Senator Bragg, who spoke about language. What I want to do this evening is to put on the record what might yet be unknown to many First Nations people, and that is the experience that I had, and learned from, under the tutelage of my colleague in the Senate Senator Nova Peris, when we visited Elcho Island with the standing committee on health. It was the first occasion that I had been in a community where language—their own Indigenous language—was so prominent, and, because of her knowledge and her understanding of culture, Senator Peris revealed to me how important it would be if we were able to take the evidence in language, and that's what we did. We actually got a translator on the day and we took evidence in language. The day commenced with all the English—all the magic words that we say—but it changed, and the whole tenor of the room was transformed as First Nations people spoke to the parliament in their own language. We now have, within our standing orders—and perhaps this is not widely known—the capacity for all of our committees to take evidence in language and for that language to be reported and recorded in Hansard in language as well as in English. This is not only a just and right thing to do; this is a powerful thing to do—to recover language and to prize the multitude of beautiful languages of the First Nations people. These are small things, and it will be a combination of many small things that will help us advance from this moment, when we can continue to hope and strive towards a better nation in which the glaring failure of our previous policies is writ large in the revealing of the Closing the Gap targets. There has been far too little progress on these matters over many years, but in the last eight years it's been a wholesale disaster. Last year, the government basically wiped the slate and re-established a different scheme where there would be 17 new targets. I'm heartened that three of those 17 targets were met: improving birth weight and early education attendance and reducing the number of Indigenous teenagers in youth justice. But it is horrifying to see the 14 commitments that are not on track. There has been no progress on Indigenous life expectancy, no progress on reducing the rate of overrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander kids in out-of-home care, and no progress on reducing the rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults held in incarceration. And, tragically— Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 95 ADJOURNMENT Rail, Tram and Bus Union, Scalas, Ms Fortunata 96 19:20 Senator O'NEILL 140651 New South Wales I'd like to make a contribution on two very important matters. The first I'd like to address is the great work of the Rail, Tram and Bus Union and their campaign, Keep Freight on Aussie Trains. That campaign has highlighted the growing pressure on Australia's interstate rail freight industry, chiefly due to the deregulation of the coastal shipping sector. The deregulation jammed through by Tony Abbott allows foreign vessels to carry domestic freight through the exploitation of workers who are paid a mere $3 an hour. Federal Labor will address this growing problem, and we have committed to a comprehensive review of the rail freight sector to ensure rail continues to play an important role in the movement of freight across Australia in order to strengthen the industry and ensure that it continues to deliver goods efficiency, safely and productively. I also acknowledge the work of Senator Hanson in this space for drawing attention to this issue. But of course, as a Labor senator for the great state of New South Wales, I am very proud to stand with the RTBU members of that state and indeed the national body of RTBU members, who have a right and a responsibility, and take it very seriously, to advance the interests of Australians. They demand that the government back the domestic rail freight industry and commit to Australian jobs for Australian workers. The deregulation agenda that we see from this government hurts us. It hurts us in so many ways. It cuts jobs, it erodes conditions, it impacts on other people we share the planet with, even if they're not Australian citizens, and it certainly hurts our sovereign capability. This should not be happening. We are in the moment, with this COVID reality wrapped around us, of a complete review of the way we live our lives. We want to go back to normal, we yearn for a return to normal, but I fear that, as time passes, there will be no return. We're going into a vastly different Australia—an Australia where we understand we're part of the global world, but we really need to protect our national sovereignty and capacity. That is why I acknowledge and applaud the great work of the Rail, Train and Bus Union and their political activism in the interests of the people of Australia. Finally, Acting Deputy President Chandler, as a member of a political party, you would understand how important civic participation is and how wonderful it is to have members of our parties who live and breathe a passion for our great democracy. I rise today to speak on the passing of one such amazing Australian citizen, my comrade and dear friend of Copacabana fame, none other than Fortunata Scalas. Indeed, she was a very longstanding member and treasurer of the Kincumber Branch of the ALP, a stalwart of the ALP on the Central Coast. Nata was a constant and eager campaigner, a tireless booth worker, a community activist and a dedicated branch member. She took democracy very seriously, and I'm very pleased that she landed on the Labor side of the ledger. She counselled members of parliament and had a bubbling passion for life and politics that invigorated all who came into her orbit. She was a great Labor woman. Nata saw the world through those insightful, loving and generous eyes of hers, and she advocated at every opportunity for fairness and decency for all. She was also an avid gardener and prolific cook, and she adored her family. In turn, they adored her, as did her friends and members of the local community. Nata was a devoted wife, mother and grandmother, as well as a solid community activist in the interests of all. My thoughts and prayers are with her and her beautiful family. I'm sure her memory and the great times that she had with them will be a blessing for them for many years to come. I acknowledge the passing of the wonderful Fortunata Scalas. Higher Education 96 19:25 Senator FARUQI 250362 New South Wales [by video link] It is hard to describe the current dire state of affairs for Australian universities without getting very angry at the Morrison government. Make no mistake: at every single turn throughout COVID-19 and, in fact, since their election, the Liberals and Nationals have failed and attacked our universities. Earlier this year, Universities Australia estimated the 2020 job losses at our universities at more than 17,000 jobs. This is a truly enormous number, no matter how you spin it. These people are the next generation of researchers, the next generation of educators and thinkers. Some of these educators have left higher education for ever. Universities will never get them back. But, as bad as 2020 was, the situation has worsened in 2021. By the accounts of those in the sector, it isn't going to get any better in the next few years without a significant change in course. Just in the last few months, the University of Adelaide has been canvassing cuts of up to 130 jobs. Macquarie University will likely make another more than 80 academic staff redundant by the end of 2021, on top of the nearly 300 let go last year. The University of Western Australia is set to axe 300 to 400 staff as they restructure and respond to income loss, and is considering a proposal to completely abolish the departments of anthropology and sociology. La Trobe University has announced cuts of over 200 full-time equivalent positions, meaning over 500 La Trobe staff will have been made redundant in the last 18 months. It goes on and on and on. Everywhere you look, our public universities are shedding staff, cutting courses and, in some cases, shutting down entire departments. This is an incredibly grim picture and my heart goes out to every higher education worker in this country who is at the coalface of this vicious austerity agenda. In years to come, when we reflect back on how things came to be so bad, we will almost certainly have to point to 2020 as the year that the coalition stuck the knife in. Last year was the culmination of seven years of misfired and failed attempts to undermine and defund our universities. Last year they got it done, with the so-called 'job-ready graduates' legislation. This year we're seeing the impacts of the double whammy of the pandemic and the new funding regime. In the double-speak of the coalition, apparently the JobReady Graduates package increased funding to universities and was a long-overdue, positive reform for the sector. What a load of nonsense! Universities across the country are continuing to shed staff, courses and departments. Students are paying more than ever before for their degrees, with the government contributing less and less of the cost. The next generation of would-be researchers and educators are looking at the state of our universities and deciding, 'not for me'—all because the Morrison government have completely abandoned the higher education sector and students. They have completely failed to recognise the value of public education for the whole of society. But we have not. We will continue to hold the Liberals accountable for their shameless defunding of our universities and perpetual attacks on this essential public institution. We will also closely watch the Labor Party, who have so far not presented a clear, viable alternative to the Liberals' slash and burn agenda for universities. Of course we want to see the Liberals gone at the next election—and that will be good riddance. After the complete and utter disaster of the last eight years, we will be glad to see the back of them. Let me put the Labor Party on notice as well: if we do see a change of government, there is an absolute and undeniable expectation from the university sector, from staff and from students that you will turn this ship around. It will not be good enough to tinker around the edges and sit on your hands. That's why we need the Greens in shared power come the next election, so we can ensure that the next government guarantees well-funded, fee-free university education in this country. There is not a moment to waste. COVID-19: Vaccination 97 19:29 Senator ROBERTS 266524 Queensland Australians and people worldwide criticise politicians. After three years in parliament, I know why. Yet people allow politicians to rule their lives and allow governments to take control of their lives. Why? I invite people to ask basic questions and to then decide. Consider the drug ivermectin. It's been given in 3.7 billion doses over 60 years—no adverse effects; safe. Ivermectin is off patent—affordable. In 2013 ivermectin was approved in Australia for treating diseases. In 2014 I took ivermectin after working in India. It cured me—no adverse effects. Australian doctors regularly prescribe ivermectin for illnesses. Is it effective with COVID? In April 2020 in the Senate, I raised ivermectin's promising in vitro trials at Monash University. Counties, states and regions in South America, Asia, Africa and Europe have had amazing success with ivermectin for treating, curing and preventing COVID. More than 40 peer-reviewed scientific papers have been published hailing ivermectin's success in treating COVID. A study among Indian healthcare workers showed an 83 per cent reduction in COVID infections with just two tablets. Ivermectin, overseas, is recognised as a cure. I'm told that Queensland doctors and dentists are stockpiling ivermectin for their families. An internationally respected Australian specialist recently saved 24 very sick patients in quarantine using ivermectin. All quickly recovered. Two others not treated died. Overseas, ivermectin is a prophylactic, stopping COVID transmission. Where vaccines are failing, ivermectin is succeeding. How many deaths would have been saved if the health minister had acted? I have prescriptions for ivermectin from two doctors. Why can't all Australians have that freedom to choose? Why isn't Australia's government adopting ivermectin? Why did the TGA threaten and try to silence me with a letter when I discussed ivermectin with constituents as their representative in parliament? I mentioned ivermectin in a YouTube video and was banned for a week. Member of parliament Craig Kelly made statements based on solid data. After speaking about ivermectin, Facebook banned him forever. Why are doctors scared of being struck off the doctors' registry if they prescribe ivermectin to cure their patients? Consider the vaccine maker Pfizer's profits. It's second quarter 2021 revenue was $19 billion, up 89 per cent. In three months, it made $4 billion profit. The European Medicines Agency discovered a definite link between Pfizer's vaccine causing myocarditis. In September 2020, our TGA approved Pfizer's Vyndamax drug to treat myocarditis. Our health department confirmed the AstraZeneca vaccine's links with blood clots. Pfizer's Eliquis drug treats blood clotting. Last quarter its sales were up 13 per cent. So are those blood clots rare? Really? In 2019 Pfizer's Zavicefta drug was approved to ICU patients on ventilators. Is Pfizer making profits making people sick and more profit treating the sickness it caused? Consider the ownership of vaccine makers. Alphabet owns YouTube and Google. Alphabet owns 12 per cent of Vaccitech, which created the AstraZeneca vaccine. YouTube bans videos mentioning ivermectin as a COVID treatment. Aren't these conflicts of interest? If ivermectin was approved for COVID, what would happen to big pharma's hundreds of billions of dollars in profits? These profits are a transfer of wealth from taxpayers to big pharma. Before becoming health minister, Greg Hunt was the environment minister, where he joined Malcolm Turnbull steering a law through parliament as a basis for a global carbon dioxide tax. In 2000 and 2001, he spent two years at the World Economic Forum in Davos developing strategy. A simple question: did he work on the forum's great reset? I have already spoken on the government's lack of a proper COVID management plan. Why has Minister Hunt falsely claimed that the government's COVID policy is based on science when he is contradicting science? Finally, who owns the legacy media suppressing news of ivermectin's success? In summary, ivermectin would complement vaccines, give people informed choice, save many lives, end lockdowns—and, in doing so, save more lives—save money, restore our economy to secure future health and end any need for vaccine passports or vaccine prisons. Basic freedoms, jobs and livelihoods could be restored. Why is the government not using ivermectin as a proven, safe, affordable life saver? Feel welcome to share your answers with my office or Facebook page. Finally, I add, I have no financial interest in any drug or medical suppliers or companies. Senate adjourned 19:36