The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sue Lines ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024
I do personally find it offensive that you made an assertion that I support the Qantas Group underpaying wages … I am not on a unity ticket with Qantas and Alan Joyce when it comes to ripping off Qantas workers through labour hire … And I do ask you to withdraw that because I never have and never will.
Mr Morrison refused to meet us, and I can remember that quite clearly. It's very hard to explain that we actually felt abandoned by the government of the time because nobody would meet with us, except for the Labor opposition. The Morrison government offered no support, and they continued to praise Qantas and say that it was a decision for Qantas. That feeling of abandonment was quite striking. I can remember, many times, various politicians and prime ministers saying, 'We will govern for everybody,' and we just felt that nobody wanted to tackle Qantas. We were left to sink or swim until … the Labor opposition came in, as well as the TWU, and started supporting us.
Scott Morrison, as I said before, refused to meet with us. Michael McCormack did meet me once. He said he could look for some support service hotlines for us. I also remember quite clearly that he told me the best thing that ever happened to him was being retrenched in his early 40s. I thought at that time, 'It may have worked for you, but it's not working for a lot of my colleagues.' I thought it was rather a strange comment.
It seems quite strange to say, but the gentleman who we met with that day seemed more interested in telling his own story than listening to our story. That was the common consensus amongst the other delegates who attended that meeting that day.
The trends observed over the past 12 months—
appear to be structural and unlikely to change in the short term.
However, best discount economy airfares have not yet fallen to pre-pandemic levels. The general fall when adjusted for inflation may not reflect consumer experiences, who are still paying significantly more to fly in nominal terms than they did prior to the pandemic.
Despite evidence of falling airfares and stability in overall passenger volumes and capacity, service reliability remains a significant concern …
Factors contributing to poor service reliability and within airlines' control, include efforts to manage systemic issues associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, pilot shortages, pilot training bottlenecks and some supply chain disruptions.
That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the following bills, allowing them to be considered during this period of sittings:
Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024
Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024
Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024
Autonomous Sanctions Amendment Bill 2024
Broadcasting Services Amendment (Community Television) Bill 2024
Competition and Consumer Amendment (Fair Go for Consumers and Small Business) Bill 2024
Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support and Family Assistance Technical Amendments) Bill 2024.
National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment Bill 2023
At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate notes that:
(a) a large proportion of First People applicants to the National Redress Scheme are likely to be Stolen Generations Survivors, and to be effective and safe it is imperative the scheme:
(i) ensures access and safety throughout the process as a priority,
(ii) be treated with the importance and integrity that survivors deserve, and
(iii) be delivered in a way that avoids all risks of re-traumatising survivors; and,
(b) fundamental to achieving these goals is ensuring appropriate support services receive proper, ongoing funding including:
(i) increasing resourcing to ensure proper, ongoing funding to Stolen Generations organisations and First Nations community-controlled healing services,
(ii) ensuring proper, ongoing funding for redress support services, to allow them to provide access to a suite of counselling services, including financial and legal,
(iii) improving access to culturally appropriate and trauma-informed professionals, services and interventions,
(iv) ensuring trauma-aware, healing-informed training for all individuals working across the design and implementation of the scheme, including external organisations and consultants, and
(v) for non-Indigenous organisations operating in the space, providing careful regulation and monitoring to ensure that they meet the quality, cultural and ethical standards required of the scheme's operations; and
(c) the above must be ensured across jurisdictions, including in remote and regional areas where English might not be the first language; and
(d) there is documented evidence that prisoners are more likely to have been victims of child sexual abuse compared with the general population; and
(e) the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights has pointed out that restrictions to redress for those with certain serious criminal convictions could be in breach of the entitlement of survivors to claim redress, limit the right to an effective remedy, and be in breach of notions of equality and non-discrimination.
The Senate divided. [10:39]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Chandler)
(1) Schedule 1, Part 2, page 7 (line 1) to page 9 (line 10), to be opposed.
(2) Schedule 1, item 20, page 18 (lines 17 to 30), omit subsections 210(5) and (6).
The restriction against prisoners applying was in part a response to concerns that confidentiality and access by support services would be difficult. However, given the Royal Commission report stated the evidence that people in jail are more likely than the general population to have been victims of child sexual abuse, the restriction on prisoners applying to the Scheme is perceived as unjust.
… constitute a significant bar discouraging applicants and deterring other potentially eligible applicants from applying.
The committee divided. [11:11]
(The Chair—Senator McLachlan)
(1) Schedule 1, page 15 (after line 17), after Part 4, insert:
Part 4A — Civil proceedings after accepting offer of redress
National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018
19A Section 43
Before "If", insert "(1)".
19B Section 43
Omit "this section" (wherever occurring), substitute "this subsection".
19C At the end of section 43
Add:
Civil proceedings after accepting offer of redress
(2) Paragraph (1)(b), as it relates to a person who has accepted an offer of redress, ceases to have effect by force of this subsection for the period of 12 months starting on the day this subsection commences if:
(a) the person accepted the offer of redress in the period starting on 1 June 2022 and ending on 1 November 2023; and
(b) at the time the person accepted the offer of redress:
(i) an order (however described) made by a court was in force to permanently stay civil proceedings brought or continued against a released institution or official for abuse of the person that is within the scope of the scheme; or
(ii) there was a reasonable possibility that, if the person were to bring or continue such proceedings, a court would make such an order or an application for such an order would be made in relation to the proceedings.
(3) The following have effect by force of this subsection if, within the 12-month period mentioned in subsection (2), the person brings or continues civil proceedings (the post-acceptance proceedings ) against a released institution or official for abuse of the person that is within the scope of the scheme:
(a) the release and discharge mentioned in paragraph (1)(a), as it relates to the person and the post-acceptance proceedings (including any appeals), is taken not to have been made;
(b) the 12-month period during which paragraph (1)(b) ceases to have effect in relation to the person is extended in relation to the post-acceptance proceedings until the end of the day on which those proceedings (including any appeals) are finally determined.
(4) An order made by a court, in relation to the post-acceptance proceedings, for the payment of compensation or damages for abuse of the person does not affect the person's entitlement to redress under the scheme, whether the order is made before or after one or more components of redress are provided to the person.
(5) A court may, in exercising its discretion in making an order for the payment of compensation or damages for abuse of the person in relation to the post-acceptance proceeding, have regard to any redress payment for the person under the scheme if doing so is just and reasonable in the circumstances.
The committee divided. [11:39]
(The Temporary Chair—Senator Sterle)
That the House of Representatives be requested to make the following amendment:
(1) Schedule 1, page 15 (after line 17), after Part 4, insert:
Part 4B — Expanded access to redress
National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018
19D Section 4 (paragraph (e) of the paragraph beginning "To be entitled to redress")
Omit "or a permanent resident", substitute ", a permanent resident or currently resides in Australia".
19E Section 11 (paragraph beginning "Then the person must")
Omit "or a permanent resident", substitute ", a permanent resident or currently resides in Australia".
19F Paragraph 13(1)(e)
Repeal the paragraph, substitute:
(e) the person is an Australian citizen or a permanent resident (within the meaning of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 ), or a person who currently resides in Australia, at the time the person applies for redress.
2475-EM
National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment Bill 2023
(Request for an amendment to be moved by Senator Thorpe, in committee of the whole)
Statement pursuant to the order of.the Senate of 26 June 2000
Amendment (1)
Amendment (1) is framed as a request because it amends the bill to expand the eligibility criteria for redress payable under the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 . The effect of the amendment is to extend eligibility to persons who currently reside in Australia at the time they apply for redress, even if they are not an Australian citizen or a permanent resident.
As the amendment is intended to increase the number of individuals that would be eligible to receive a redress payment, the amendment is likely to increase the expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 161 of the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 .
Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant .to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000
Amendment (1)
If the effect of the amendment is to increase expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 161 of the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 then it is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate that the amendment be moved as a request.
The committee divided. [11:49]
(The Temporary Chair—Senator Sterle)
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:
(2) Page 47 (after line 10), at the end of the Bill, add:
Schedule 3 — Other amendments
National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018
1 Section 6 (after the definition of sexual abuse )
Insert:
Note: See also section 6A.
2 After section 6
Insert:
6A Sexual abuse includes virginity testing
To avoid doubt, sexual abuse includes the examination of female genitalia, with or without consent, for the purpose (or purported purpose) of determining virginity.
In 1971 I was a research engineer at AWA MicroElectronics … Through a series of events, I ended up being involved in the Wayside Chapel at Kings Cross, particularly as a volunteer, and then later on becoming employed by them. One of the things that stuck out to me was the number of homeless, runaway and abandoned children at risk on the streets of Kings Cross. Later research I did showed that the two places where kids in trouble went, or headed for, were Kings Cross and the Gold Coast. The stories that I heard and that I was talking with kids about were just horrific, and it was wrong then! I couldn't believe how people would allow these things to go on.
There were stories kids would tell me of being raped in institutions or of being adopted and the adoptions failing and then going back into so-called care and being abused in the care. One of the stories that really got to me was of a young girl I'd talk with a lot—I've got an apology from DoCS on the wall here. She used to run away from the institution she was in. She was a young Aboriginal girl and she used to rub her skin against the bricks, hoping it would turn white so that they wouldn't have to rape her anymore. I'd find kids who had been adopted and given back to the institution and then run away from the institution. It was just appalling. It was like, 'My God!'
Then I began to hear about these young girls. They were telling me they had to undergo these virginity tests, and I said, 'What?' They were explaining that often it was done without any gloves or anything. It was just done. I used to talk a fair bit to Bill Langshaw, who was the head of child welfare at the time, and he said 'Look, we are setting up a child welfare review committee. How about you go on it?' Oh, dear! It brings me to tears. The first meeting of the committee was run by this Roman Catholic priest. The meeting started and he said, 'I haven't been in an institution for 44 years and that makes me eminently suitable to run this thing.' I got up and I talked about the fact that these virginity tests were being done and there was no need for them. Of course, they said, 'Oh, no. We have to do that.'
There were many practices in that time around children that were wrong then and are wrong now. I think it was because I came into it with no prior background and, coming from a call it a normal home, it was just obvious that it was all wrong, and I began to make a fuss. I found that the child welfare workers or whatever—I just didn't have anything to do with them in the end. There were all these sorts of practices. I came across all these young girls …
sexual abuse of a person who is a child includes any act which exposes the person to, or involves the person in, sexual processes beyond the person's understanding or contrary to accepted community standards.
The committee divided. [12:10]
(The Chair—Senator McLachlan)
That this bill be now read a third time.
But water's being overused and the next drought is only a matter of time. We have to make sure there's enough water, otherwise the rivers may run dry.
If we don't act, it could threaten our iconic Aussie plants and animals, our food supply and affect the drinking water of more than 3 million Australians.
Over the last 10 years—
Australia did something which no other country could conceivably have managed—in a large irrigated agricultural economy (the Murray-Darling Basin) a 70% reduction in water availability had very little aggregate economic impact.
Not only for the economy but … for ameliorating the environmental damage of the terrible drought.
Even with better forecasting, improved planning and new policies in place, we cannot drought-proof the Basin. Droughts will continue to impact communities and the environment.
The need to plan for drought has been understood since the early days of water management in Australia. Before dams were built along the River Murray, dry times meant parts of the river and its tributaries would sometimes be reduced to a series of pools, or cease to flow at all.
These experiences highlighted the need to manage the Murray in a more cooperative manner and build the dams, weirs and other structures to provide a more reliable flow.
During a drought, all allocations are reduced, whether the water is for farming or the environment.
So far, 15 food delivery riders and a rideshare driver have been killed at work. There's no time to lose in protecting these workers and their families in every state and territory with the workers' compensation safety net.
While gig workers suffer, large corporations reap the benefits. Uber, a global giant, continues to operate without contributing to WorkCover premiums. Instead, taxpayers shoulder the responsibility, by footing the bill through compulsory third party insurance.
For Ben in my office, the result yesterday and this bill mean that people want his relationship to matter. They want it to be equal and they want people like Benny and his partner, James, to have the opportunity to get married.
Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) Bill 2024
Our connection to the country doesn't stop at the water's edge … Our oceans have fed us, are home to our totems and are central to our culture.
… … …
We are only here to comment on schedule 2 part 2 of the bill. We believe these provisions should be withdrawn. Consultation with traditional owners must be done properly. We have a right to a voice about what happens in our sea country.
This is not a process that we believe is consistent with free, prior and informed consent. We question why this bill is being brought now, while the EPBC reforms are being consulted on and whilst DISR are seeking feedback on consultation requirements for offshore petroleum and greenhouse gas storage regulatory approvals.
… … …
Our songlines are sacred to us. They have been passed on to us through lore, generation to generation, for the sustainability and longevity of all life on Earth. It is our collective responsibility to pass them on to our children intact.
For us Tiwi people, our ties to sea country are so important to the survival of our connection to our cultural and spiritual beliefs, which non-Indigenous people may not understand or comprehend … We will always be part of the sea environment and the land where our ancestors lived, where they are buried and where they practised our ancient culture.
… … …
When we use your law to stand up for ourselves and win, you want to close that gap so you can keep ignoring us …
It is shameful and disgraceful that this government is using a bill designed to protect workers after injuries and deaths at Woodside's Burrup Hub to wipe out environmental approvals.
I regard the relationship … as second to none of the relationships that I have around the world or indeed domestically, for that matter … it's a relationship of trust …
I don't think there's any difficulty in knowing where they are.
That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Trade and Tourism (Senator Farrell) and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Senator Watt) to questions without notice asked by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Birmingham) and Senators Paterson and McDonald today relating to foreign relations, the NZYQ case and offshore gas exploration.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Gallagher) to a question without notice I asked today relating to housing.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by Senator Gallagher to a question without notice I asked today relating to reproductive health care.
That the Senate take note of the statement.
That the provisions of paragraph (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the Defence Trade Controls Amendment Bill 2024 and the Defence Amendment (Safeguarding Australia's Military Secrets) Bill 2024, allowing them to be considered during this period of sittings.
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 2024 AUTUMN SITTINGS
DEFENCE TRADE CONTROLS AMENDMENT BILL
Purpose of the Bill
The Bill amends the Defence Trade Controls Act 2012 to: regulate the supply of certain military or dual-use goods and technology on the Defence and Strategic Goods List (DSGL) from Australia to certain foreign persons both within and outside of Australia; regulate the provision of services in relation to DSGL Part 1 military goods or technology to foreign persons or entities; and remove the requirement to obtain a permit for supplies of certain DSGL goods and technology and the provision of certain DSGL services to the United Kingdom or the United States.
Reasons for Urgency
The Bill requires urgent consideration and passage to realise benefits and opportunities to Australia under AUKUS and meet US Congressional certification timeframes relating to Australia's export control regime.
_____
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 2024 AUTUMN SITTINGS
DEFENCE AMENDMENT (SAFEGUARDING AUSTRALIA'S MILITARY SECRETS) BILL
Purpose of the Bill
The Bill amends the Defence Act 1903 to establish a framework to regulate the work that certain former defence staff members (foreign work restricted individuals) can perform without a foreign work authorisation; and the training that Australian citizens and permanent residents, other than foreign restricted individuals, may provide without a foreign work authorisation.
Reasons for Urgency
The Bill requires urgent consideration and passage to realise benefits and opportunities to Australia under AUKUS and meet US Congressional certification timeframes relating to Australia's export control regime.
That—
(1) Consideration of the business before the Senate be interrupted at the specified time, but not so as to interrupt a senator speaking, to enable senators to make their first speeches (of approximately 20 minutes), as follows:
(a) Wednesday, 20 March 2024, at 5 pm—Senator Sharma; and
(b) Monday, 25 March 2024, at 6 pm—Senator Ghosh.
(2) On Tuesday, 26 March 2024:
(a) consideration of the business before the Senate be interrupted at 6 pm, but not so as to interrupt a senator speaking, to enable senators to make valedictory statements relating to Senator Rice; and
(b) the question for the adjournment be proposed at the conclusion of the valedictory statements, or at 7.30 pm, whichever is earlier.
That the Senate not meet on Thursday, 28 March 2024.
Competition and Consumer (Divestiture Powers) Bill 2024
That the following bill be introduced: Competition and Consumer (Divestiture Powers) Bill 2024, A Bill for an Act to amend the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Greens' Competition and Consumer Amendment (Divestiture Powers) Bill 2024 gives the Court the power, under an application by the Australian Competition and Consumer Agency, to order a company to reduce their power or share of the market by divesting assets if they are found to have misused their market power under section 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 .
In effect, this Bill gives the Courts and competition regulators the power—where misuse of market power has occurred—to break up firms right across the economy, including, but not limited to the supermarket duopoly: Coles and Woolworths.
Some examples of a divestment order that a Court could make would be:
Monopolies and oligopolies are bad for consumers, bad for workers, bad for suppliers and bad for the economy more broadly.
When a corporation has an excessive share of the market they often abuse their power by:
Market concentration impedes competition and is a massive drain on the economy as a whole. It reduces productivity growth, slows innovation, impacts the quality of products available to consumers and leads to higher inflation through excessive prices.
Evidence shows the more market share a corporation has, the easier it is for them to maintain and increase their power. Instead of spending their time focusing on improving productivity they use their excessive power to aggressively block competitors and influence key decision makers to weaken any attempts at regulation.
In Australia, our economy is getting much less competitive as top firms across the economy hold a high and growing share of the market. Recent Treasury analysis shows that the market power of Australia's largest firms has increased in the last two decades. This has coincided with higher price markups and sluggish productivity. Average firm mark-ups in Australia increased by around 6 per cent between 2004 and 2017.
Australia's high level of market concentration across the economy has contributed to the inflationary cycle Australians are currently experiencing. At Estimates in February this year, Reserve Bank Governor, Michelle Bullock agreed that some firms are using a lack of competition and the cover of high inflation to hike prices above what would be required to meet increases in their input costs.
Ms Bullock joins growing consensus among economists, including at the OECD, the IMF, the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve, former ACCC Chair Allan Fels and the Australia Institute that corporations are price gouging to boost their own profits, in a cost of living crisis, which is making inflation worse.
Increased markups and price gouging represents millions more profits for corporations while everyday people increasingly struggle to afford to pay for essential products and services.
Every day that this Parliament refuses to act to reign in the power of big corporations, more and more people skip meals, fall behind on their rent and mortgage payments, and delay vital medical appointments.
Nowhere is the issue of market concentration more stark than in Australia's supermarket sector. In the 1950s Woolworths and Coles had around 10 per cent market share, and in the 1970s they had 34 per cent.
Today, the duopoly dominate the sector, with 65 per cent market share. According to former ACCC Chair, Professor Allan Fels, Australia's grocery sector is amongst the most concentrated in the world. It is more concentrated than comparator countries, including the UK, Germany and the United States.
At its most recent full year results, Coles posted $1.1 billion full-year profit, while Woolworths lifted its annual profit to $1.6 billion. Professor Fels has found that high market concentration has resulted in supermarket profits that are higher than they would be in a competitive market.
Take for example, the UK. It has 6 major retailers, who had operating margins in the 2022-23 financial year, ranging from 1 to 4 per cent. The top two retailers have 40 per cent market share. Not perfect, but significantly better than in Australia.
Contrast this with the profits of Australia's duopoly. In 2023, Woolworths reported an operating margin of 6 per cent and Coles reported 4.8 per cent.
Interestingly, the average operating margins of the major grocery retailers in the UK fell at the same time that the market share of discounters, Aldi and Lidl, was increasing.
It's clear that greater competition reduces supermarket profits and brings down prices for consumers.
When the Prime Minister was asked about divestiture powers a few weeks ago, he dismissed the idea as 'Soviet Union' policy.
However, this is not a controversial or radical idea. The United States of America has had divestiture powers for over 130 years, since 1890, where they've been used effectively to reduce the market power of companies in a range of industries, including the break-up of the AT&T telephone monopoly in the 1980s.
The UK also has divestiture powers. The competition agencies of Ireland, Italy and the Netherlands have all recently required the divestment of supermarket assets in order to increase local competition.
Gina Cass-Gotlieb, the Chair of the ACCC—Australia's national competition regulator—has agreed that if divestiture powers were introduced, they could increase competition in the supermarket sector and under economic analysis, this would bring down the cost of grocery prices.
The Australian Council of Trade Unions, led by Professor Allan Fels recommended Australia should introduce a divestiture law to allow big firms to be broken up where the Court determines a firm has broken competition law.
The Parliament should support this Bill as a critical part of the toolkit to stop corporations using their market power to gouge prices while raking in billions of dollars in profits.
This Parliament should support the interests of people over corporate profits and greed.
I commend this Bill to the Senate.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) order for the production of documents no. 479, agreed to by the Senate on 28 February 2024, regarding application processing data from Services Australia has not been complied with,
(ii) the Minister for Government Services stated that the order seeks 'not a document that is in existence, but one that would need to be created', and
(iii) the Minister for Government Services further stated that a 'request for information of this kind in this way is appropriate for a question on notice';
(b) rejects the grounds that the Minister for Government Services has provided for not complying with the order, noting that:
(i) it is a well-established principle that orders for the production of documents may require the creation and production of documents by the person or body having the information to compile the documents, and
(ii) refusing to comply with the order on the grounds that the information could be obtained via a question on notice or at Senate estimates is not an acceptable basis to withhold information from the Senate; and
(c) requires the Minister for Government Services to comply with the order by no later than midday on Monday, 25 March 2024.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Finance, by no later than midday on Monday, 25 March 2024, a copy of the February 2024 assurance review into the Research Supply Icebreaker Project, the existence of which was confirmed in a response to a question on notice following the Environment and Communications References Committee's hearing for its inquiry into Australian Antarctic Division funding with Department of Finance officials on 28 February 2024.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water, by no later than 8 April 2024, the following:
(a) all documents, advice and correspondence between the First Nations Heritage Protection Alliance Leadership Working Group; the Joint Working Group; the Implementation Working Group; the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water; and the Minister's office relating to the First Nations cultural heritage reforms being undertaken by the First Nations Heritage Protection Alliance and the Australian Government since 1 August 2022; and
(b) all meeting notes, briefing notes, meeting invite lists and minutes from consultation sessions that occurred for the purposes of stage 2 consultations for the First Nations cultural heritage reforms since 1 August 2022.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Treasurer, by no later than midday on 5 April 2024, all written or digital correspondence, briefing notes, file notes, meeting agendas or minutes, or other records of interaction, in relation to the national competition reform or the 7 March 2024 meeting in Sydney at which federal, state and territory representatives discussed national competition reform, since 1 January 2023, between:
(a) the Treasurer or his office and state and territory Treasurers or their offices; or
(b) the Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury or his office and state and territory Treasurers or their offices.
That there be laid on the table, by the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water, by no later than 10 am on Thursday, 28 March 2024:
(a) any ministerial submissions and briefings provided by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water to the Minister, relating to advice on the potential extinction of the Maugean skate;
(b) the ministerial brief MS23-002605 and its attachments; and
(c) any ministerial submissions and briefings provided by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water to the Minister relating to requests for reconsideration of decision EPBC 2012/6406 from 16 November 2023.
That the following matter be referred to the Community Affairs References Committee for inquiry and report by 7 October 2024:
The practice and governance surrounding the prescription of puberty blockers to children in Australia, with particular reference to:
(a) the adequacy of the evidence base supporting the safety and clinical effectiveness of puberty blockers as a treatment option for children experiencing gender dysphoria, including an examination of international developments and decisions, such as the move by United Kingdom (UK) health authorities to ban the routine prescription of puberty blockers to young teenagers;
(b) the transparency and accessibility of outcome data from Australian children's hospitals and gender services on the long-term impacts of puberty blockers on children, including but not limited to brain development, bone mineral density, future fertility and sexual function, as well as mental health outcomes;
(c) the consistency of Australia's approach to the prescription of puberty blockers with international best practices and the evolving global understanding of their risks and benefits, including a comparison with policies in the UK, the Netherlands, Norway, Finland, and other countries that have recently revisited their stance on gender-affirming care;
(d) the processes and criteria used by Australian health services, including the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne and others, in deciding to initiate puberty blocker treatment, with an emphasis on the exploration of psychological complexities and the consideration of alternative treatments;
(e) the role of professional consensus and the development of national standards of care in the absence of long-term outcome data, and the impact of these standards on clinical governance and decision-making processes;
(f) the views and experiences of patients, families, clinicians, and other stakeholders directly affected by the prescription of puberty blockers, including the adequacy of informed consent processes and the support provided to patients and families;
(g) the response of Australian medical bodies and health departments to international critiques and recommendations regarding puberty blockers and gender-affirming care;
(h) the impact of social transition as the beginning of the child gender-affirmation process, including pressures on educators and health professionals to affirm preferred pronouns and identities, with a focus on the approach's potential harm and the need for reconsideration; and
(i) any related matters.
The Senate divided. [16:00]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Treasurer, by no later than midday on 27 March 2024, all written or digital correspondence, briefing notes, file notes, or other records of interaction since 1 January 2023, in relation to changes to the deductible gift recipient status of school building funds, or any other changes to the arrangements generally, between:
(a) the Treasurer or his office and the Department of the Treasury;
(b) the Treasurer or his office and the Productivity Commission;
(c) the Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury or his office and the Department of the Treasury;
(d) the Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury or his office and the Productivity Commission; or
(e) the Treasurer or his office and the Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury or his office.
The Senate divided. [16:08]
(The President—Senator Lines)
Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that today the Australian Greens propose to move "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The Albanese Government must not continue to spend upwards of $360 billion in public funds on the increasingly unlikely chance we might get AUKUS nuclear submarines, while abandoning our sovereignty and destabilising the region."
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency: That the Albanese government must not continue to spend upwards of $360 billion in public funds on the increasingly unlikely chance we might get AUKUS nuclear submarines, while abandoning our sovereignty and destabilising the region.
"We have no social life, we don't go out …
'When we go into town to Bendigo, we go to the swimming pool and have a shower. We're on tank water in the caravan, and we need to conserve that and buy as little water as possible.
"Half of our meals are mince and anything else is the cheapest cut. We'll go into the supermarket late in the day if we want biscuits and buy what's on special."
The Senate divided. [16:41]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator O'Sullivan)
Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that today I propose to move "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The need for Environment Minister Plibersek to urgently guarantee that the economic and social importance of, and the hundreds of direct and indirect jobs that depend on, Tasmania's salmon industry are not in any way negatively impacted by any decision taken by the Government under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ".
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The need for Environment Minister Plibersek to urgently guarantee that the economic and social importance of, and the hundreds of direct and indirect jobs that depend on, Tasmania's salmon industry are not in any way negatively impacted by any decision taken by the Government under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 .
The government has been dragging its heels on this review …
The government has been dragging its heels on this review but at the end of the day Tanya Plibersek will have to decide what she thinks is more important: the livelihoods of blue collar regional Tasmanian families or the overblown concerns of inner-city activists about a fish they've decided to make famous.
I urge Minister Plibersek and the Prime Minister …
… to think about the people here on the West Coast. It's cruel to let the kids and the families start the school year with this hanging over their heads.
The Senate divided. [17:46]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate take note of the document.
Australian Government Response to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Final Report
Inquiry into the Capability and Culture of the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA)
March 2024
Introduction
The Australian Government (the Government) welcomes the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme's (the Committee) final report of its inquiry into the Capability and Culture of the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA, the Agency).
On 14 September 2022, the Committee announced it had initiated an inquiry into the capability and culture of the NDIA. The Committee would inquire into the implementation, performance, governance, administration and expenditure of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), with particular reference to:
The Government notes that the Committee received a total of 206 submissions and held 13 public hearings across the country. The Committee tabled an interim report for this inquiry on 30 March 2023 and its final report on 16 November 2023.
The final report makes 27 recommendations. In addition, the Committee made five recommendations in its interim report. There are a further three recommendations from the Coalition and seven recommendations from the Australian Greens. This Government response addresses all recommendations made in relation to the inquiry.
Two significant and related processes ran in parallel to this inquiry:
1. The Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability (the Disability Royal Commission) published its final report on 29 September 2023. It made 222 recommendations on how to improve laws, policies, structures and practices to ensure a more inclusive and just society that supports the independence of people with disability and their right to live free from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation.
2. The Independent Review of the NDIS (the NDIS Review) released its final report on 7 December 2023. It made 26 recommendations, with 139 detailed actions under these recommendations, to help restore trust, ensure the Scheme's sustainability, and deliver a better NDIS experience for participants.
There is considerable overlap and alignment between the Committee's recommendations in its interim and final reports and the recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission and the NDIS Review. The Government response to this inquiry notes where there is alignment between these recommendations, and does not pre-empt the Government's response to the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
The Government acknowledges that the Committee's recommendations in its interim and final reports, along with the recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission and the NDIS Review, are aligned with the Government's focus on rebuilding trust and confidence in the NDIS and getting the Scheme back on track. The Government accepts reform is required to secure the future of the NDIS, so that it can continue to provide life-changing outcomes for current and future generations of Australians with disability. This hard work necessarily starts with lifting the capability and capacity of the NDIA.
The Government is working openly and transparently, as it takes forward the further work required with the disability community and state and territory governments on the response to the Disability Royal Commission and the NDIS Review.
The Government has already invested more than $429.5 million through the 2023-24 Budget to lift the NDIA's capability, capacity and systems to better support participants. These investments include better decision-making processes and planner capability for participants with specialised needs, strengthening guidelines for planners on support volumes and intensity, and providing clear minimum standards of evidence for assistance with daily living.
The Government is committed to transparency and partnership with the disability community in delivering these initiatives.
The Government has also worked through National Cabinet on an initial response to key aspects of the NDIS Review. On 6 December 2023, National Cabinet agreed to work together to implement legislative and other changes to the NDIS to improve the experience of participants and restore the original intent of the NDIS to support people with permanent and significant disability, within a broader ecosystem of support.
The National Cabinet agreed to jointly design additional Foundational Supports to be jointly commissioned by the Commonwealth and the states, with the work to be oversighted by the First Secretaries Group.
An initial tranche of legislation will be introduced into the Commonwealth Parliament in the first half of 2024, with rule changes phased in as developed.
This is a significant step. These commitments demonstrate governments' ongoing commitment to the NDIS. It reinforces support for the NDIS and the social and economic inclusion of people with disability across the nation.
Discussions with the disability community will continue over the coming months as we work together to make the positive changes needed for people with disability.
Inquiry into the Capability and Culture of the NDIA
Recommendations made by the Committee in the Interim Report
1. Interim Report—The Committee recommends that NDIA staff have comprehensive training in disability awareness and anti-discrimination, and that the Government support planners and other NDIA staff, including contact centre staff, develop specialised skills in specific areas of disability and participants' needs, so the Scheme can serve the diversity of NDIS participants.
Australian Government response to Interim Report recommendation 1: Noted
The Government is committed to improving the training and development for NDIA staff so that the NDIS works for all participants, including those from diverse backgrounds.
There are a number of initiatives underway including mandatory annual training on contemporary disability rights, disability awareness and diversity for all people working at the NDIA, access to a Disability Navigator and Disability Snapshots, a Disability Inclusion Plan, deep dives led by the NDIA's Disability Champion focused on improving accessibility and inclusion, and co-designing a new Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) strategy and First Nations strategy.
The NDIA is also transforming the National Contact Centre (NCC) by redeveloping and expanding the NCC induction training, doubling the amount of training provided to staff, creating and training specialist teams with a new additional advanced skills program, and a skills-based routing model design, which will direct calls to specialised teams based on menu selections.
The Government's investment in the NDIA's capability, culture and systems will build on these initiatives and allow the NDIA to invest in a workforce capacity and capability package to improve training, tools, and system improvements for planners and partners. It will also improve the consistency, cultural inclusivity, and experience of the planning process for both the frontline workforce and participants.
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 22 of the NDIS Review to embed a highly skilled, person-centred, disability aware culture across all disability agencies and governments.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
2. Interim Report—The Committee recommends that the Government lift staffing caps and improve workplace culture to reduce staff turnover and improve the experience of participants through continuity of relationships.
Australian Government response to Interim Report recommendation 2: Noted
The Government is committed to increasing permanent staffing at the NDIA, by reducing insecure labour hire arrangements, investing in leadership capability development and career pathways, and improving Agency culture.
The proportion of permanent Australian Public Service (APS) roles has increased from 69.59 per cent as of 30 June 2023 to 75.95 per cent as of 31 December 2023. Between 30 June 2023 and 31 December 2023, the number of permanent APS roles has increased by 1,279 (5,328 to 6,607). The number of temporary roles decreased, with APS non-ongoing roles decreasing by 112 (324 to 212) and Labour Hire roles decreasing by 122 (2,004 to 1,882). 292 Labour Hire workers also transitioned to APS employment with the Agency over this period.
Service Delivery roles continue to be the priority area of Agency workforce growth. Between 30 June 2023 and 31 December 2023, the number of Agency Planners has increased by 895 (2,303 to 3,198).
The implementation of the APS Strategic Commissioning Framework, released by the Australian Public Service Commission in October 2023, will result in additional increases to Agency ASL in financial years' 23-24 and 24-25. The framework sets a clear expectation that most roles and functions in Government Agencies will be delivered by APS employees and outlines the limited circumstances in which external workforces such as labour hire can be engaged. The Agency is currently developing an implementation plan to support to support role transition and ensure adherence to the framework for new recruitment requests in the Agency.
The Agency is making good progress in reducing rates of employee turnover. Over the 12 months to 31 December 2023, the Agency staff turnover rate for ongoing APS employees has decreased from 11.20 per cent to 7.86 per cent; a reduction of 3.34 per cent.
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 22 of the NDIS Review to embed a highly skilled, person-centred, disability aware culture across all disability agencies and governments.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
3. Interim Report—The Committee recommends that the Government invest in training of staff and updating systems to improve the quality and transparency of decision-making, and to ensure that decisions consistently meet the requirements of the NDIS Act, so participants do not have to tell their stories again and again to multiple people.
Australian Government response to Interim Report recommendation 3: Noted
The Government is committed to ensuring the NDIS planning process is simpler and more transparent for NDIS participants. The NDIA's Participants, Platforms and Processes (3P) Project will improve the consistent application of NDIA's processes, and better support participants through a new fit-for-purpose business system called PACE, to eventually replace the NDIA's current Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system and portals. The PACE system was successfully tested in Tasmania and commenced national implementation on 31 October 2023. The NDIA has been working directly with staff, participants, and providers in designing the change program required to support implementation of PACE.
The NDIA is building PACE in a way that futureproofs the system, recognising it will need to be flexible to implement future legislative changes and outcomes of ongoing codesign, as required, including changes arising from the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
The Participant Service Improvement Plan (PSIP) is published on the NDIS website and outlines 51 commitments to ensure NDIS transparency. These commitments have a strong focus on a more consistent experience for NDIS participants when they are interacting with the Agency, which is clearer and more easily understood.
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway and Recommendation 22 to embed a highly skilled, person-centred, disability aware culture across all disability agencies and governments.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
4. Interim Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA adopt a participant- led, user-centred design approach to improve the participant experience, including better supporting participants at life-changing events.
Australian Government response to Interim Report recommendation 4: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
5. Interim Report—The Committee recommends that the Government address the concerns of participants that a plan underspend might lead to reduced funding in their next plan.
Australian Government response to Interim Report recommendation 5: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
Recommendations made by the Committee in the Final Report
1. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA assess people according to the totality of their disabilities and no longer require participants to nominate 'primary disability' and 'secondary disability'.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 1: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
2. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA review, publish and implement changes to List A: Conditions that are likely to meet the disability requirements, and List B: Conditions that are likely to result in a permanent impairment to improve inclusion of invisible, episodic, rare, and psychosocial disabilities.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 2: Noted
The Government notes amendments to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) Act 2013 , which took effect on 1 July 2022, clarified that episodic and fluctuating impairments can be considered permanent when determining eligibility to the Scheme, including for people with psychosocial disability.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway and Recommendation 7 to introduce a new approach to NDIS supports for psychosocial disability, focused on personal recovery, and develop mental health reforms to better support people with severe mental illness.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
3. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA develop, publish, and implement a mechanism to improve staff knowledge and acceptance of invisible, episodic, rare, and psychosocial disabilities.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 3: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with the following recommendations in the NDIS Review:
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
4. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA develop and implement a mechanism to recruit and retain staff with specialised knowledge and skills regarding invisible, episodic, rare, and psychosocial disabilities.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 4: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 7 of the NDIS Review to introduce a new approach to NDIS supports for psychosocial disability, focused on personal recovery, and develop mental health reforms to better support people with severe mental illness and Recommendation 22 to embed a highly skilled, person-centred, disability aware culture across all disability agencies and governments.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
5. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA focus its compliance activities on the activities of service providers and subcontractors, to prevent systematic fraud and to ensure that people with disability do not experience further discrimination in wider society.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 5: Supported
The Fraud Fusion Taskforce (FFT) brings together 16 Government agencies to deliver a whole-of-government capability uplift to detect and respond to potential fraudulent and criminal activity against the NDIS and deliver greater integrity and fairness across Commonwealth programs and payments.
The FFT has new capabilities to identify misuses of NDIS funds intended to support people with disability. The FFT is reducing risk to participants by disrupting bad practice and fraudulent behaviours of providers, including prosecuting and shutting them down. FFT activities strengthen and improve the NDIS and other government systems, making it easy to do the right thing and harder to do the wrong thing.
In addition, the NDIA regularly delivers a variety of education and awareness sessions to assist providers to understand their roles and responsibilities as a NDIS provider. This includes general sessions focused on operating as a provider within the NDIS, as well as issues specific sessions on topics such as good payment practices. These information sessions are supported by a variety of provider focused online resources available on the NDIS website.
6. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission make recommendations to the Fraud Fusion Taskforce for increasing investigation, detection, and prosecution of systematic fraud against the Scheme.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 6: Supported
The Government notes the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission is a key contributor to the Fraud Fusion Taskforce (FFT), being a permanent member on all governance committees, driving the strategic direction of the FFT.
7. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory government counterparts to ensure that children with a disability who need access to early childhood intervention services are able to do so, especially in rural, regional and remote areas.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 7: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 6 of the NDIS Review to create a continuum of support for children under the age of 9 and their families.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
8. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments to ensure that the rights and wishes of participants of the NDIS are upheld and respected when they are under guardianship and trustee orders.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 8: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA introduced a new Supported Decision Making policy in April 2023 to better support people with disability to make decisions in the NDIS, including those participants with child representatives and nominees under the NDIS Act.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 5 of the NDIS Review to provide better support for people with disability to make decisions about their lives, and Recommendation 6.15 of the Disability Royal Commission on updating the national standards for public advocates, public guardians and public trustees.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final reports of the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
9. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA keep and maintain accurate records of participants under guardianship and/or financial administration orders.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 9: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA is working with state and territory guardian and financial administrators to improve processes and management of records related to state and territory guardianship and financial administration orders.
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 6.15 of the Disability Royal Commission on updating the national standards for public advocates, public guardians and public trustees.
The Government is considering these issues further as part of its response to the Disability Royal Commission.
10. Final Report—The Committee recommends that, where a participant is under a guardianship order, NDIA delegates and planners are required to meet with the participant, including a face-to-face option, to ensure that plans reflect the wishes of the participant.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 10: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA introduced a new Supported Decision Making policy in April 2023 to better support people with disability to make decisions in the NDIS, including those participants with child representatives and nominees under the NDIS Act.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 5 of the NDIS Review to provide better support for people with disability to make decisions about their lives and Recommendations 6.6 and 10.6 of the Disability Royal Commission in relation to Supported Decision Making principles, and to amend the NDIS (Quality Indicators for NDIS Practice Standards) Guidelines 2018 (Cth) to reflect that each participant has opportunities to make decisions and is supported to develop their decision making skills and communicate their will and preferences.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final reports of the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
11. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Australian Government work with its state and territory counterparts to establish a joint task force with the powers necessary to investigate any instances where NDIS participants are exploited, coerced, or abused while being supported by the state regulated Supported Residential Services sector.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 11: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 9 of the NDIS Review to deliver a diverse and innovative range of inclusive housing and living supports and Recommendation 17 to develop and deliver a risk-proportionate model for the visibility and regulation of all providers and workers, and strengthen the regulatory response to long- standing and emerging quality and safeguards issues.
This recommendation also overlaps with Disability Royal Commission recommendations 10.13, 10.14 and 10.15 in relation to creating an independent investigators panel for complaint handling and investigative practice guidelines.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final reports of the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
12. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Australian Government work with its state and territory counterparts to develop comprehensive guidance regarding the regulation of disability accommodation providers who are also NDIS providers.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 12: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 9 of the NDIS Review to deliver a diverse and innovative range of inclusive housing and living supports and Recommendation 17 to develop and deliver a risk-proportionate model for the visibility and regulation of all providers and workers, and strengthen the regulatory response to long- standing and emerging quality and safeguards issues.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
13. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Australian Government develop, publish, and implement a mechanism to ensure that a participant's support coordinators, accommodation provider, and support providers do not have conflicts of interest that would impact the quality or safety of participant supports.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 13: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA regularly deliver a variety of education and awareness sessions to assist providers understand their roles and responsibilities and expectations of good practice. This includes advice on identifying and managing conflict of interest.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with the following recommendations from the NDIS Review:
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
14. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Australia Government re- evaluate the design of grant funding under the Information, Linkages and Capacity Building program, giving consideration to the complexity and transparency of the application process, length of funding periods, and amount of funding available.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 14: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
15. Final Report—The Committee recommends the Australian Government promote secure, long-term investment in activities that support people with disability, including through Information, Linkages and Capacity Building funding.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 15: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
16. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Information, Linkages and Capacity Building program be refocused to better meet the needs of people with disability through ongoing evaluation of outcomes and facilitation of information sharing and strategic development of services across jurisdictions.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 16: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
17. Final Report—The Committee recommends the Australian Government revise the administrative arrangements for Information, Linkages and Capacity Building grants, consistent with recommendation 5.6 of the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability for the Australian Government to establish new governance arrangements for disability policies and programs.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 17: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability and Recommendation 5.6 of the Disability Royal Commission to establish new governance arrangements for disability policies and programs.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final reports of the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
18. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Department of Social Services revise the role of Local Area Coordinators to ensure sufficient resources are directed to the roles of capacity building, information sharing, and community engagement, alongside coordinating NDIS supports.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 18: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability and Recommendation 4 to support all people with disability to navigate mainstream, foundational and NDIS service systems.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
19. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA ensure that planners fully explore current and future accommodation and support needs with participants during pre-planning, planning and plan reviews.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 19: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 8 of the NDIS Review to fund housing and living supports that are fair and consistent, and support participants to exercise genuine choice and control over their living arrangement.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
20. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA allow participants to use plan budgets more flexibly, including in situations where short term or emergency accommodation is required.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 20: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway and Recommendation 8 to fund housing and living supports that are fair and consistent, and support participants to exercise genuine choice and control over their living arrangement.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
21. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA develop and publish clear, comprehensive guidance material for participants who seek to transition into other forms of supported accommodation, including state disability housing, Supported Independent Living, or Specialist Disability Accommodation.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 21: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 8 of the NDIS Review to fund housing and living supports that are fair and consistent, and support participants to exercise genuine choice and control over their living arrangement.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
22. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA implement mechanisms to support women with disability who are at risk of, or have experienced, domestic, family and sexual violence, including expedited approvals for Supported Independent Living, Specialist Disability Accommodation and Short Term Accommodation, where it is considered reasonable and necessary.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 22: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA released the Participant Safeguarding Policy and Implementation Plan in April 2023. The Agency's initial focus is to support frontline staff to have a more complete and individualised view of participant risk of harms from abuse, neglect, violence and exploitation, and opportunities to meaningfully mitigate these risks through supports that can be provided through NDIS supports and services. The implementation of the Policy will include a capability uplift of NDIA staff and partners to further embed a safeguarding culture within the NDIA.
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with NDIS Review Recommendations 8 and 9 regarding housing and living supports, and Recommendation 16 regarding safeguarding.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
23. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA improve connections with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peak organisations with the goal of improving co-design, and access to culturally appropriate services.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 23: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA and First Peoples Disability Network (FPDN) jointly established a First Nations Advisory Council in 2023. First Nations Advisory Council members include First Nations people with lived experience of disability, peak body, and sector representatives.
The NDIA will work with the First Nations Advisory Council to discuss and make shared decisions about the goals, strategies, and initiatives that affect First Nations people with disability. This included working on a review NDIS First Nations Strategy and action plan.
The NDIA is progressing the development of a new First Nations Strategy, to replace the 2017 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Strategy. The NDIS has publicly committed to working with First Nations people with disability, participants, the broader First Nations disability community, families, carers, and sector stakeholders to co-design this strategy.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 14 of the NDIS Review to improve access to supports for First Nations participants across Australia and for all participants in remote communities through alternative commissioning arrangements and Recommendation 20 to create a new compact between Australian governments.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
24. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA improve connections with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse peak organisations with the goal of improving co-design, and access to culturally appropriate services.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 24: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 2 of the NDIS Review to increase the scale and pace of change in mainstream and community inclusion and accessibility and improve the connection between mainstream services and the NDIS and Recommendation 22 to embed a highly skilled, person-centred, disability aware culture across all disability agencies and governments.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
25. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the NDIA invest in building staff capacity to drive an inclusive culture and appropriate support for LGBTQIA+ people with a disability.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 25: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA is working with the disability and LGBTIQA+ community to review and update the NDIS LGBTIQA+ Strategy in 2024.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability and Recommendation 22 to embed a highly skilled, person-centred, disability aware culture across all disability agencies and governments.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
26. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Department of Social Services provide ongoing and adequate funding of advocacy organisations, including disability advocacy organisations.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 26: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability and Recommendation 6.21 of the Disability Royal Commission on additional funding for advocacy programs.
The Government is considering these issues further as part of its response to the release of the final reports of the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
27. Final Report—The Committee recommends that the Australian Government has regard to the recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission 4.7 (right to live free from exploitation, violence, abuse), 6.41 (legislative prohibition of non-therapeutic sterilisation), 7.3 (improve policies and procedures on the provision of reasonable adjustments to students with disability) and 10.1 (embedding human rights) in the implementation of the NDIS and throughout the participant planning pathway.
Australian Government response to Final Report recommendation 27: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with the following recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission and the NDIS Review:
The Government is considering these issues further as part of its response to the release of the final reports of the NDIS Review and the Disability Royal Commission.
Recommendations made by the Coalition in the Final Report
1. Coalition—The Committee recommends that the NDIA co-design and implement a Sex and Relationships policy to give NDIA staff and participants clear guidelines on the approach to related supports. Additionally, the Committee recommends that planners and coordinators are trained to engage with participants about relationships and sexual expression goals during the development of plans.
Australian Government response to Coalition recommendation 1: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
2. Coalition—The Committee recommends the ILC program be administered by the NDIA, with robust links with the Department of Social Services.
Australian Government response to Coalition recommendation 2: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
3. Coalition—We recommend the Labor Government resume releasing the NDIS Monthly summaries, and immediately release the outstanding 2022-23 Annual Financial Sustainability Report and the NDIS Independent Review in full.
Australian Government response to Coalition recommendation 3: Noted
The Government notes the 2022-23 Annual Financial Sustainability Report was released on 8 December 2023 and the NDIS Review was released on 7 December 2023.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 23 of the NDIS Review to measure what matters, build an evidence base of what works, and create a learning system.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
Recommendations made by the Australian Greens in the Final Report
1. Australian Greens—The Australian Greens recommend that the Standing Council of Attorneys General expedite national consistency for public guardianship and trustees, including improving the lives of disabled people by considering removing the protection and confidentiality laws order, national consistency of fees, transparency of decision-making, and implementing supported decision making and reviews of orders.
Australian Government response to Australian Greens recommendation 1: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 6.15 of the Disability Royal Commission on updating the national standards for public advocates, public guardians and public trustees.
The Government is considering these issues further as part of its response to the final report of the Disability Royal Commission.
2. Australian Greens—The Australian Greens recommend that the ILC program be administered by the NDIA, with robust links with the Department of Social Services.
Australian Government response to Australian Greens recommendation 2: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
3. Australian Greens—The Australian Greens recommend that the NDIA ensure that planners fully explore current and future accommodation and support needs with participants during pre-planning, planning and plan review.
Australian Government response to Australian Greens recommendation 3: Noted
The Government notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 8 of the NDIS Review to fund housing and living supports that are fair and consistent, and support participants to exercise genuine choice and control over their living arrangement.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
4. Australian Greens—The Australian Greens recommend the NDIA review processes to ensure they are inclusive of gender and sexuality, including exploring establishing supports such as shared safe spaces for LGBTIQA+ disabled people.
Australian Government response to Australian Greens recommendation 4: Noted
The Government notes the NDIA is working with the disability and LGBTIQA+ community to review and update the NDIS LGBTIQA+ Strategy in 2024.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 1 of the NDIS Review to invest in foundational supports to bring fairness, balance and sustainability to the ecosystem supporting people with disability and Recommendation 3 to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
5. Australian Greens—The Australian Greens note the impact of algorithmic technologies, such as Robodebt and recommend that the NDIA and the Department of Social Services immediately cease any use of algorithmic technologies or automated decision-making with participants.
Australian Government response to the Australian Green's recommendation 5: Noted
The Government notes NDIS access and planning decisions are not made using algorithmic technologies or in an automated manner. The NDIA uses data to assist in the prioritisation of work and to support staff in making decisions by providing benchmarks. This approach is consistent with that used more broadly within an insurance context to enable efficient decision making. It is important to note that a human is still required to review all available information and make a determination.
6. Australian Greens—The Australian Greens recommend the NDIA take steps to ensure financial transparency, including making available to the public the full Annual Financial Sustainability Reports.
Australian Government response to Australian Greens recommendation 6: Noted
The Government notes the 2022-23 Annual Financial Sustainability Report was released on 8 December 2023.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 23 of the NDIS Review to measure what matters, build an evidence base of what works, and create a learning system.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
7. Australian Greens—The Australian Greens recommend that NDIA planners and coordinators are trained to engage with participants about relationships, gender, and sexual expression goals during the development of plans.
Australian Government response to the Australian Green's recommendation 7: Noted
The Government notes NDIA staff are required to complete online training in Unconscious Bias, Diversity and Inclusion.
The Government also notes this recommendation overlaps with Recommendation 3 of the NDIS Review to provide a fairer and more consistent participant pathway and Recommendation 4 to support all people with disability to navigate mainstream, foundational and NDIS service systems.
The Government is considering these issues further in response to the release of the final report of the NDIS Review in late 2023.
As Chair of the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, I rise to speak to the tabling of the committee's Scrutiny Digest 4 of 2024 .
Scrutiny Digest 4 of 2024 reports on the committee's consideration of twelve bills which were introduced into the Parliament during recent sitting weeks, as well as amendments made to 1 bill.
In the Digest, the committee has identified potential scrutiny concerns in relation to 3 newly introduced bills. The Digest also contains the committee's comments on recent ministerial responses in relation to 10 bills.
The committee welcomes undertakings made in relation to bills which partially address scrutiny concerns raised by the committee. These include undertakings to amend the Digital ID Bill 2023 to provide for the tabling of reports in Parliament, and a commitment by the Minister for Finance in relation to the Appropriation Bills (Nos 3 and 4) 2023-2024 to consider improving guidance on budget measures marked as not for publication. The committee thanks the Minister for Finance for her constructive engagement with the committee.
In this Digest, the committee has commented on the retrospective validation or application of legislation in relation to an unusually high number of bills.
The committee has long-standing scrutiny concerns about provisions that have the effect of applying retrospectively, as it challenges a basic value of the rule of law that, in general, laws should only operate prospectively. The committee has a particular concern if the legislation may have a detrimental effect on individuals. In such cases the committee expects the explanatory materials to set out the reasons why retrospectivity is sought, whether any persons are likely to be adversely affected and the extent to which their interests are likely to be affected. As the purpose of such an explanation is to assist the committee, and ultimately the Parliament, to reach a conclusion as to the impact that a measure might have on personal rights and liberties, the proponents of legislation should take the broadest possible view of the interests that could be adversely affected.
Further, the committee expects that such analysis should take into account the possibility that the previous actions were not undertaken in accordance with the law regardless of the Government's views on the remoteness of this possibility. The detrimental impact could then be balanced against the policy justification for the validation provisions, of which the intention of the Parliament in enacting the provisions, and the remoteness of the possibility of legal invalidity would be relevant factors.
This issue was highlighted by the committee in its comments on retrospective validation provisions in the Autonomous Sanctions Amendment Bill 2024. The Minister's response to the committee's scrutiny concerns indicated that no Australians or Australian business would likely be adversely affected as the bill confirmed the validity of existing sanctions listings. However, if the validity of the listings is in question, as evidenced by the inclusion of the validation provisions in the bill, an assessment of the adverse affect on people should not commence from the assumption of validity. Instead, in order to assist the committee, and ultimately the Parliament, to reach a conclusion as to the appropriateness of retrospective validation, information should be provided concerning its impact in the event that past actions were invalidly taken.
Any litigation on foot and any past court decisions that the bill seeks to respond to should also be detailed.
Similarly, I would also like to draw the Senate's attention to the committee's comments on the Financial Framework (Supplementary Powers) Amendment Bill 2024.
The bill seeks to amend section 32B of the Financial Framework (Supplementary Powers) Act 1997 , which was inserted into the Act in response to the decision of the High Court in theWilliams case. In that case, the Court held that, in most cases, the Executive requires statutory authority before it can enter into contracts and spend public money.
The section purports to provide this statutory authority by providing for the Executive to make legislative instruments setting out how its own powers to contract and to spend are to be expanded. The amendments in the current bill seek to clarify that instruments may do so even where the power to enter into such contracts and spend money exists in other legislation. The bill also seeks to provide for retrospective validation of past spending in the event that the spending was not previously authorised.
While the explanatory memorandum to the bill states that the changes are wholly beneficial in operation by negating any risk of invalidity of payments, it is unclear to the committee that this is necessarily the case if a broad view of the types of interests that may be affected is taken.
In this instance, it appears to the committee that retrospective validation could impact the rights of people with an interest in challenging the validity of spending for a particular purpose. As such, it would be appropriate for the explanatory materials to weigh any detrimental affect the provision could have on the interests of people against the benefits of providing clarity and certainty. This would enable the Parliament to make a fully informed decision as to whether the retrospective validation proposed unduly trespasses on personal rights and liberties.
The committee has sought further advice in relation to when and how the need for the amendments proposed by the bill and the retrospective validation of past uses of the power under section 32B became apparent during the Department of Finance's review of the operation of the Act.
Apart from the appropriateness of the retrospective validation of past spending, the committee also has fundamental scrutiny concerns regarding the mechanism provided under section 32B of the Act. This is due to the insufficient parliamentary scrutiny and oversight of public expenditure involved, and the inappropriate delegation of legislative powers to the Executive.
The committee is not persuaded by the Minister for Finance's advice to the committee that the fact that government spending has already been agreed to by the Government provides sufficient justification for the legislative provision. The committee considers that it is appropriately a matter for the Parliament to determine whether spending for a particular policy purpose should be so authorised. As such, the committee draws the attention of senators to the appropriateness of authorising, via regulation, the expenditure of public money.
I encourage all parliamentarians to carefully consider the committee's analysis contained in the Digest. With these comments, I commend the committee's Scrutiny Digest 4 of 2024 to the Senate.
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of the document.
That the Senate take note of the additional estimates reports of 2023-24 tabled by the government whip.
Superannuation (Objective) Bill 2023
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The bill that I introduce today will enshrine an objective of superannuation in legislation.
It defines the objective as: to preserve savings to deliver income for a dignified retirement, alongside government support, in an equitable and sustainable way.
This simple and straightforward objective will serve as a guide for future governments, regulators, industry, and the wider community—
Instilling greater confidence in the system.
Australia has a world class superannuation system that is the envy of countries across the globe.
But for the last ten years super policy has been costly, confused and chaotic.
Those opposite raided the superannuation system for their own purposes with a devastating impact on the retirement savings of millions of Australians.
Around $36 billion in savings meant to last a lifetime were drained out of super accounts in a matter of months.
Legislating an objective of super will help prevent this sort of short-sightedness ever happening again -
Making sure the focus of super is on the best interests of members, and not on those interested in ideological battles.
The objective will help ensure super delivers on its foundational promise of providing a dignified retirement for more Australians.
It will secure super's future by embedding its purpose into law.
This will ensure that any future changes to the superannuation system will support its objective, not supplant it.
The bill does this by requiring Ministers to produce a statement to Parliament explaining how any proposed changes to super are compatible with its purpose.
Policymakers will be held to account when considering changes that affect Australians' retirement savings.
The objective will not alter superannuation trustees' existing obligations.
Super funds will continue to be required to make investment decisions in the best financial interests of their members.
This legislation also doesn't change the ability of members to get early access to their super on compassionate grounds or in cases of financial hardship.
For trustees, the objective will serve as a reminder of their role to support members during their working life and into retirement.
And with more Australians approaching retirement age than at any time in our history, delivering better retirement incomes has never been more important.
This bill is an important next step towards a stronger super system for a stronger economy and it has been met with strong industry support.
We know that superannuation is a significant source of capital -
It contributes to the strength of our financial markets—
And there are opportunities to leverage superannuation investment in areas of national economic priority where it aligns with the best financial interests of members.
Having a clear, legislated objective of super will help ensure these broader benefits of super can be maximised.
This will be a defining decade for our nation, and that demands defining the role of superannuation—
To protect the gains that have been made and pursue its greater potential.
Labor built super, we'll protect it and make it the best it can be to ensure it continues to deliver dignity in retirement for generations of Australians to come.
Full details are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.
That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 1 May 2024:
The implications of Glencore's proposed carbon capture and storage (CCS) project by its subsidiary, Carbon Transport and Storage Corporation (CTSCo), in the Great Artesian Basin, with particular reference to:
(a) the environmental impact assessment process and the adequacy of the project's approval by federal and state regulatory bodies, including the decision not to classify the project as a controlled action under national environment law;
(b) the potential risks and impacts of the project on the groundwater quality within the Great Artesian Basin, especially concerning the findings related to the acidification of groundwater and mobilisation of heavy metals such as lead and arsenic;
(c) the scientific basis and transparency of the data supporting the project's safety claims, including the robustness of fieldwork, data, and analysis presented by CTSCo and critiques by independent hydrogeologists and aqueous geochemists;
(d) the potential socioeconomic impacts on agriculture and regional communities, relying on the Great Artesian Basin for water, including an assessment of the project's impact on existing and future water use rights;
(e) the consultation processes undertaken with stakeholders, including farmers, Indigenous landholders, environmental groups, and the broader public, and the adequacy of these processes in addressing stakeholder concerns;
(f) the potential precedent set by allowing CCS projects within the Great Artesian Basin and its implications for future projects, considering Australia's strategic interests in preserving its largest groundwater system;
(g) the role of CCS technology in Australia's broader climate change mitigation strategy, including an evaluation of its efficacy, risks and alternatives; and
(h) any other related matters.
Hostile intelligence activity continues to pose a real threat to Australia, our sovereignty and our security.