On behalf of the , I move:

That the resolution of appointment of the Select Committee on Social Media and Online Safety be amended to replace 'final report on or before 15 February 2022' in paragraph (2) with 'final report on or before 15 March 2022'.

Question agreed to.

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, I present the committee's report entitled NDIS workforce final report and I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report.

Is leave granted?

For the member for Menzies, it certainly is.

I thank the honourable member and the House. I'm pleased to present the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme's final report for its inquiry into the NDIS workforce. Critical to the sustainability of the NDIS, one of Australia's most ambitious public policy initiatives, is a workforce of a sufficient size and which has the appropriate skills, qualifications and expertise to deliver safe, quality supports to participants. It is estimated that the NDIS workforce will need to grow by an additional 83,000 full-time-equivalent staff to support participants at the scheme's projected peak. However, attracting and retaining suitably skilled, qualified workforce continues to prove a significant challenge, with systemic issues persisting and the sector increasingly seen as overworked, underpaid, undervalued and poorly trained.

In December 2020, the committee tabled an interim report for this inquiry. Aware that the Australian government was at the time developing a national workforce plan for the NDIS, the interim report examined the range of issues facing the NDIS workforce, made 14 recommendations on how such matters should be addressed, and outlined what the content, scope, and focus of the forthcoming NDIS workforce plan should be.

The committee welcomed the release of the NDIS National Workforce Plan: 2021-25 in June 2021, along with other measures identified by the Australian government in response to the committee's interim report. However, evidence since provided to this inquiry has demonstrated that ambitious action is needed to adequately address issues within the NDIS workforce and to safeguard the availability of safe and quality supports for NDIS participants into the future.

This unanimous final report for this inquiry makes eight recommendations relating to the need for increased workforce data collection, enhanced employment opportunities for people with disability and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, increased student placement opportunities and appropriately resourced training and upskilling initiatives. Recommendations further call for the development of clear and measurable outcomes for each of the initiatives under the government's NDIS National Workforce Plan as well as a comprehensive consultation strategy for its implementation.

The committee acknowledges actions that have been taken by the NDIA and by the Australian government so far to address some of the workforce issues facing the NDIS and the disability sector more broadly. The committee will continue to monitor the implementation of the NDIS National Workforce Plan: 2021-25 and other matters related to the NDIS workforce and may take up particular issues in future inquiries.

The committee thanks all those who contributed to the inquiry by lodging submissions, providing additional information or expressing their views via correspondence. The committee would also like to thank those who gave their time to attend the committee's public hearings. In particular, the committee acknowledges people with disability, their families and carers who shared their experiences. The testimony of people with lived experience is crucial to identifying issues with the NDIS and improving the operation of the scheme.

May I thank all my colleagues on the NDIS committee for their work not just on this inquiry but on many inquiries during this term of parliament. I would particularly like to extend our thanks on behalf of the committee to the secretariat, headed by Bonnie Allan, for their sterling work on this inquiry and other inquiries, including ongoing inquiries before the committee. I commend the report to the House.

I would also like to acknowledge the role of the member for Menzies. I think that's his penultimate report, but, if I don't get the chance next time to say it, I'll say that the member for Menzies takes his responsibilities as a parliamentarian very seriously, and I think this committee and the work it's done over the course of the last 2½ years demonstrates that some things in parliament are working pretty well. This is certainly one of them.

Turning to the NDIS workforce report, I think it's fair to say that the workforce of disability carers in this country feel that they have been insufficiently supported through COVID, and I'll come to the specific recommendations in a moment. But the story of the disability workforce during COVID has, I think, highlighted some of the deeper problems and the lack of forward planning for the workforce that has marked the development of this sector during the NDIS.

Disability sector workers were left in the dark at the beginning of the pandemic when they were at the front line of the COVID-19 crisis. It's fair to say the workforce is burned out. They're exhausted from non-stop work to ensure that people with disability don't miss out on critical care. People with disability and their workforce have had to navigate the relentless strain of isolating from work and life when identified as a close contact, often without pay. And many, many disability workers have caught COVID themselves, putting their own health, their families and the people they care for at risk. Despite caring for some of the most clinically vulnerable Australians, they found it too hard to access appropriate PPE material which would have kept them and the people they care for safe. I have heard firsthand many stories of families of participants and care workers desperately trying to find PPE material so that the people who enter the houses of the participants can be properly cared for.

I sat next to disability workers getting vaccinated on their own time because they can't get paid time to even go and get a test or to get vaccinated. Like the people they wonderfully care for, too many people have waited too long for vaccines and then for boosters. Rapid antigen tests in the month of January and first part of February should not have been like searching for needles in a haystack. The disability workforce are required to have rapid antigen tests, but in January many people working in the sector could not find one for love or money. They got no discounts on the rapid tests, and NDIS participants they care for have had to pay for them out of their own NDIS plans.

Right now, down the hallway, I'm meeting with 20 disability workers, some advocates and service providers who have come to Parliament House today, fortuitously at this time of this report, to raise awareness of the difficulties they have faced. Some of the stories of the disability workers are harrowing. Mabel, who works in Canberra, caught COVID in December, which put her in isolation for Christmas. Then the people she cared for also caught COVID, with some ending up in hospital. Her workplace had little PPE and no rapid antigen tests, and, to top it off, she didn't get any paid leave for the time she couldn't work.

We've just heard from another disability worker, Asham Asham. He caught COVID at work during the delta outbreak. His workforce, again, had little access to PPE at the time. Asham's family then caught COVID off him, and he ended up being in isolation for three weeks. He had to go through workers comp to try and get paid.

Then there's the story of Ruth, a long-time worker in the sector; it's the same story. Adrian; same story. Leanne speaks about the exhaustion of people in her workplace. They've used all their leave entitlements due to the spring seasonal hayfever, followed by actual COVID and close isolation requirements. Disability workers are going poor and using up their savings just so they can help the people they care for.

There's Esther, who's down the hall. She worked with a COVID-positive participant who she lived with in a house on site. She lived there with the person for the 14 days and then had to isolate at home for a further 10 days; this was during the delta outbreak. She only got paid a COVID care allowance for her active shifts during this period. The list of the participants who were there goes on.

I believe that we can do more for the workforce. The disability workforce has 270,000 workers across 20 different skill sets or occupations in disability. The government has observed that by 2024—so within two years—we'll need to grow an extra 83,000 support workers to support the predicted half a million participants in the scheme. But we don't provide careers and we don't provide incentives for people to move into disability care. People don't become disability carers for the search of their first million dollars. The nation doesn't sufficiently value their work. They work physically and they work mentally, but they also deliver on an emotional form of labour. These are people who, like all of us, have their own lives and their own stories at home, but they can never come to work being down, being upset or being angry, because the people they care for are in tune with how their disability carer is. These people work with their brains, their hands and their hearts.

We shouldn't be asking disability care workers to subsidise the safety net of disability care in this nation. There's no doubt in my mind that, if we want to attract more people, it's not just about providing skills and training; it's also about providing a well-remunerated career path. That doesn't mean they have to be paid as princes or kings, but it does mean we're going to have to do more and fund disability even better to attract people to this sector and keep them there.

I think the NDIS workforce report tabled today offers some signs, some directions, for how we can grow the workforce. I promise the member for Menzies and I promise people with disability, people who work in the sector, advocates and service providers that these eight recommendations won't gather dust after the next election if Labor is elected. We certainly need to consult with the sector. We need a targeted strategy. We've got to upskill the workforce and we have to value them better. I, for one, thank them for everything they've put up with during COVID. I understand that, for people with disability and their carers, COVID is not over—not by a long shot.

I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

On 30 November 2021, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Ms Kate Jenkins, provided her report, Set the standard: report on the independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, to the government. The Jenkins report sets out a comprehensive set of recommendations to improve the culture of Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces and ensure all those working in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respected.

A number of the recommendations require legislative change to implement them. The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 would make initial changes to four pieces of legislation in order to implement recommendations 17 and 24 of the Jenkins report. The bill will progress important and significant reforms to help ensure that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are workplaces where expected standards of behaviour are modelled, championed and enforced, where respectful behaviour is standard and in which any Australian, no matter their sex, orientation, gender identity, race, disability or age, feels safe and welcome to contribute.

This bill would be the first of what we anticipate will be further legislative changes to implement the Jenkins report. The bill will amend the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 to strengthen and clarify the employment rights of MOP(S) Act employees. It will implement recommendation 17 of the Jenkins report. The bill will make it clear that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to MOP(S) Act employees. While this has always been the case, the bill removes any doubt by making this explicit. This would support employees to exercise their rights under the Fair Work Act. The bill requires a parliamentarian to provide reasons where they dismiss an employee from employment. This recognises that employees have a right to know why they have been dismissed and ensures dismissals under the MOP(S) Act follow best practice.

The bill would amend the Work Health and Safety Act to clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for the purposes of the WHS Act. This would clarify that parliamentarians must exercise due diligence to ensure the Commonwealth is fulfilling its duties under the Workplace Health and Safety Act. The bill also implements recommendation 17 of the Jenkins report.

The Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 provide important frameworks to protect against discrimination in the workplace and encourage diversity. The bill would amend the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to clarify these laws apply to persons employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act to put beyond doubt that these employees have protection from age and disability discrimination. These amendments implement recommendation 24 of the Jenkins report. This would bring these acts in line with amendments made to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 by the Sex Discrimination and Fair Work (Respect at Work) Amendment Act in relation to MOP(S) Act staff.

In summary, this bill will provide additional protections to MOP(S) Act employees and provides a clear intent that the government is committed to implementing the recommendations of the Jenkins report. Significantly, the reforms in the legislative package will ensure Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful and that the nation's parliament serves as a model workplace for our nation and strives for best practice in the prevention and handling of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault.

I rise to speak on the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. I'm proud to do so and regret that I have to, probably like the minister at the table. I'm proud that we're able to make this place better but sad that there is such a need. I will give you a quote:

This is Parliament. It should set the standard for workplace culture, not the floor of what culture should be.

That's a quote from one of the 490 interviews conducted as part of the independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, or the Jenkins report.

Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins, who has done an incredible job, released her important report into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces on 31 November last year. The report is aptly titled Set the standard. In what has sadly become uncommon during this 46th Parliament, the bill before parliament is the result of constructive, bipartisan efforts to produce a bill that I'm hopeful will make real change, a legacy that we in the 46th Parliament can all be proud of. This bill implements recommendations 17 and 24 of the Set the standard report.

Working for a parliamentarian is a unique experience—227 unique experiences perhaps, because there are 227 different parliamentarians here. It can have extreme highs when things are going well and deep lows when things are tough for the boss. No matter how nice your boss might be, there is always a power imbalance between a parliamentarian and their staff—I'm reading words written by a member of my staff here, but the reality is that I'm still the employer. I know this can be a very difficult workplace. I know how hard the staff work in this building and in the electorate offices which provide support remotely during sitting weeks and all year round in the electorate. People make contact when their lives are at risk, when they're feeling suicidal, when they're starving, when they're homeless—all sorts of people make contact with our 227 electorate offices.

Staff working for members of parliament have an added worry that comes around every three years—or six years in the other place for most of them, for 72 of them—and that's the performance review we go through. So they can have a boss who is out of a job, and they immediately lose their job as well. There are many reasons why working for a member of parliament may be appealing, but job security is not one of them. The minister and I, each having a marginal seat, recognise that it's a performance appraisal that's particularly difficult. Lack of job security is a major barrier to staff raising complaints. Staff should never be subjected to bullying, sexual harassment or sexual assault, wherever they're working. That's a given.

This bill implements two recommendations of the Set the standard report. We know things have changed over the life of this building, for example. I think we've heard the story before. When this building opened, there were four bars in it—I think I've got the count right. There are now zero bars in this building. One of them became a childcare facility. Things have changed in that time. To implement recommendation 17 of the report, the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 will be amended to make it clear that the provisions in the Fair Work Act apply to MOP(S) Act staff and that written notice of termination, specifying the reasons for termination, must be provided—just like a normal workplace. Recommendation 17 also provides that it should be made clear that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to parliamentarians in their capacity as employers—because those 227 members of parliament are all individual employers. In order to implement recommendation 24, the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act will be amended to clarify that those laws apply to MOP(S) Act staff.

Legislating these two changes will give greater job security to staff and, importantly, highlight to parliamentarians their obligations as employers. Remember: the only skill they have as an employer is the fact that they got 51.1 per cent of the vote or more. We come to this place with a broad range of skills and experience in the workplace, as we should. But a lot of those processes don't necessarily prepare you for the workplace and working with the secretariats and the parliamentary staff—all the people who make this incredible workplace hum. So legislating these two changes will give greater job security for staff and, importantly, highlight those obligations.

As well as legislating to provide safe workplaces, we also need to do something else: change the culture of this building and our workplaces back in the suburbs and in the bush. We need to 'set the standard', as per that quote I started with. Just yesterday, three women who were sexually harassed by former High Court judge Dyson Heydon reached a historic settlement with the Morrison government. This settlement took almost two years of negotiations after an independent investigation was concluded in 2020 and upheld the women's claims. Remember, the women we're talking about have clerked for the highest position in the land. So one would assume they know their way around a court room and a legal text book. Still, it took two years of legal negotiations. The lawyer for the three women said:

… they were so severely impacted by what happened that it took them years to come forward to pursue this matter.

An associate to a High Court judge is a coveted position. Only the brightest and most promising young lawyers are appointed. These three women, all associates to Justice Heydon, have not been able to pursue their dreams of what would likely have been very successful legal careers. This is the destruction of lives that sexual harassment and sexual assault leave in their wake.

I particularly would like to acknowledge the bravery of these three young lawyers in coming forward to call out the behaviour of a person at the pinnacle of the profession when they had only just entered it. That would've been a very terrifying experience, so I commend them for their courage.

In the last year, we have all heard of many strong, brave young women advocating for change. I commend the courage and conviction of Grace Tame, Brittany Higgins, Chanel Contos and Saxon Mullins in speaking to power and being prepared to wear the consequences when power bites back, which is happening for many of those young women. They have still had the courage to speak truth to power and they're changing the world, and changing this building. They are changing it and making it a better place, but it's up to all of us in this building to listen, because I do believe that we have failed some of them.

I note the member for Boothby, whose contribution I look forward to. We do need to call out when people target someone on the other side of the aisle, because poor behaviour is always poor behaviour. I know we could do more, and I personally could do more, but I do try to reach out when I see bad behaviour and call it out. Sometimes we do fail our colleagues when a polite word of support would, I'm sure, be appreciated, but actions are appreciated even more.

When I think of these young women, I would certainly say that they don't owe us their smiles or their politeness, as is claimed by some. As the parliament acknowledged, Mr Speaker, in response to your fine words last week—a great message to the people of Australia—we should have done better. We should have listened more. We should have acted sooner. It's certainly not good enough when a senior minister of the government describes a rape allegation as just a she-said, he-said. I hope such a thing will not be repeated. It's not good enough when a senior minister of the Crown describes an alleged victim as a lying cow.

The acknowledgment in the parliament last week by both party leaders was the start of the healing required to fix this workplace. This bill is the next step, but there is a lot more work still to do. Labor has a long-held commitment to ensuring that our parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful for everyone. That's not to say they won't be stressful workplaces. As I'm sure the people in my electorate office will know in the build-up to the next election, it is hard work. It is stressful work, and elections are a time when people come out of the woodwork with their concerns. Some are issues they have sat on for years, and they want a candidate or a politician to solve them, and some of these issues are unable to be solved easily. But we do have to make sure that all our workplaces are safe and respectful for everyone.

Labor has a commitment to gender equality—we changed our rules to reflect that commitment—including the need to promote and support women's leadership in the parliament, because you can't be what you can't see; we know that. I worry about some strong women opposite departing this parliament. I wish them all the best in their new endeavours—unless they go on Sky after dark! But whatever they do, I wish them well. We will miss their strong voice on certain topics. I wish the member for Boothby well in particular.

The Labor caucus has committed to working towards implementing all of the recommendations from the Set the standard report. We will consult with our parliamentary and electorate staff, relevant unions—an important part of any workplace negotiation—and all the workplace representatives as we work towards the implementation of Commissioner Jenkins's report. Our staff are a huge priority in this process. We need to make sure that we get it right, that we listen. I know that there is not a short supply of self-believe when it comes to politicians in this building. Sometimes we can be guilty of sitting down and listening to what we want to hear. I have found it's good to just sit down and go through this process and do the best you can in terms of hearing the concerns of your staff.

I've been very lucky with my staff over the years. I'm just a few days from the 15th anniversary of my first speech, and some staff have been with me all of that time—who have put up with me for all of that time, who've looked after me. It is brilliant. Our families are essential, obviously, but our staff are the ones that let us do this job, which I'm honoured to do.

This is their workplace. It's a stressful workplace, and they deserve nothing less than a safe and supportive work environment. The safety of everyone who works here is important. There aren't many workplaces where they say, 'Rather than going home at 8pm, you're now going to go home at 5.30 am.' That's a bizarre workplace. I know that, apart from people maybe being a little bit grumpy—and the Chair, perhaps—when it got to 5 am this place still hummed along nicely.

You're reflecting on the Speaker there!

You did a great job, Speaker, in a long night that seemed to go for about five years from what I could work out. We need to get that balance right and look after the safety of everyone, including the fourth estate. I know their job has risks as well, as we saw during the protests last week—people being attacked just for doing their job.

There's a lot of work to do. We want to make sure we look after the rights of all Australians, particularly when it comes to dismissal. There are so many complications. We want to get that balance right, particularly in those situations where your employer is unhappy with you—and let's be honest: it's more likely to be the MP or the senator who's done the wrong thing, because of their position of power—and you make a complaint about that problematic person, especially if it's going to be played out in the media. If we're talking about criminal code type behaviour, I think we need to make sure that we have an independent investigator who has a parliamentary pass and can enter the building and secure a place that they need and not have to go through an entire process. MPs and senators are political animals; we need an independent person that can enter the building and do what they need to do to pursue justice rather than be worried about the implications of any particular investigation.

Commissioner Jenkins has put together a great report. She's certainly aware that the safety of everyone who works in this building and in our electorate offices is important. As I said, there's much work to be done, and Labor's ready to do that work. and I'm sure we'll be joined by a willing coalition government as well. That's why I support this bill.

Before I give the call to the member for Boothby, I do want to just reiterate the concerns that I raised last Thursday about the sub judice rule. This is a very serious issue, and I want to restate it again before members talk en masse on this bill. The sub judice rule really impacts not just upon an accused right to a fair trial but also upon a complainant—very much so.

It also impacts upon what we know and what we hold dear in this place—that is, the doctrine of separation of powers. It is not our place, as parliamentarians in this place, to comment on matters that are before the courts. And I want to make very, very clear to all members who may be sitting in their offices preparing their speeches for the debate on this bill that I'm asking all members on the Speaker's panel—the Deputy Speaker, the Second Deputy Speaker, those on the Speaker's panel—to cut short or pick up any members who might offend the sub judice convention.

I know this is a political issue, but, in this place, we have to respect the conventions that protect our systems of law. So I'm going to call upon members to be especially aware. And I say this in the light of recent comments by the Director of Public Prosecutions in the ACT, who has urged the end 'to all public commentary, including by officers of the court and public figures'. Notwithstanding the procedures that the office of the DPP in the ACT, despite the procedures it has in place, the Director of Public Prosecutions said:

"Notwithstanding this, I strongly discourage all public commentary, on active cases, including commentary about commentary, and particularly by officers of the court and public figures."

I can't state it any clearer than that. The sub judice convention is one that should be observed in this chamber, and it is one that I'm calling on all members to follow. If you are in any doubt about whether your speech might offend the sub judice rule, then I would ask you to speak with members on your respective sides that might have some legal training, for instance, and might be able to assist you in that regard.

Speaker, just to inform those that might be crafting, I was aware of that advice. We crafted something that was along those lines. Do you have concerns about mine, or is it more of a broad—

I'm not—

Without wishing to put a spotlight on my contribution.

I don't mean to single you out, Member for Moreton, but I really do have some concerns based on what the DPP has come out and said. Very clearly, he's calling for an end to all commentary on the case, and I think we should be very alive to that. The Member for Boothby has the call.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am pleased to speak on the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. I am also pleased that you are in the chamber, and in the chair, as I begin to speak because, Mr Speaker, your comments yesterday in response to the member for Warringah and the member for Chifley, who raised concerns about the length of time that we sat last Wednesday evening, when the House didn't rise until nearly 5 am, were very thoughtful and very encouraging. For one of the first times, I heard a member in this place, a Speaker, acknowledge that, yes, we were following procedure and precedent and convention, and we were working within the rules of the House and the agreement between the parties, but that doesn't mean that we can't reflect on whether that should change. I think it does need to change.

I do not think that it is safe for anyone to be in this place for almost 24 hours straight and then have to come back within a couple of hours, if they left at all, to do another very long, full day of work in a workplace that is unlike any other. Mr Speaker, I want to record my thanks to you for the reflection that you gave on the issues that were raised, and I commend the members who raised them. These are the conversations that we need to have to continually improve the way that this place operates. Mr Speaker, thank you.

To the member for Moreton: thank you for your very kind comments. The member for Moreton is, unfortunately, one of the few people on the other side who, in my experience, has consistently called out bad behaviour, appalling behaviour, dangerous behaviour. I'm very grateful for that. Thank you. He's said some very kind things. But we all have to take responsibility for cultural change, for changing the way we interact and for changing the boundaries of the way that we interact, especially for women. The safety of everyone is becoming increasingly more fraught in this place. I want every single member and senator, and all of our staff, to be safe going about their work here in Parliament House and out in the electorate. It is our responsibility to call out bad behaviour when we see it and do whatever we can to improve it for our staff and the wonderful staff who work in this building, our staff who travel with us, and all members and senators.

The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 implements two recommendations from the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Ms Kate Jenkins, whose report, Set the standard: report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces, was handed down on 30 November 2021. I will refer to it as the Jenkins report.

The legislative changes proposed by recommendation 17 and 24 of the Jenkins report to confirm that the Fair Work Act 2009, the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 apply to people employed under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984, the MOP(S) Act. In particular, the bill implements recommendation 17 of the report by amending the MOP(S) Act to make it clear that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to MOP(S) Act employees. While this has always been the case, the bill removes any doubt by making this explicit. This is an important safety net for MOP(S) Act employees.

Amending the MOP(S) Act to require a parliamentarian to provide reasons for dismissing an employee from employment recognises that employees have a right to know why they have been dismissed and ensures dismissals under the MOP(S) Act follows best practice. Employees ought to know why their employment has been terminated and if it's for a lawful reason, such as a restructure or the end of a fixed-term contract. Amending the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 will clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for purposes of this act.

The bill also implements recommendation 24 of the Jenkins report by amending the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to clarify that these laws apply to persons employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act are sought to ensure that these workers have protection from age and disability discrimination.

It was clear through the review process that staff of parliamentarians often believed that they were presented with limited avenues to address complaints through a human resources process and that they often feared for their long-term employment prospects should their employment be terminated due to disagreements with their member or senator. These proposed changes to the MOP(S) Act will help address these issues and alleviate these concerns, providing staff with certainty through a legislative framework that clearly defines their role. The bill represents another important step in implementing recommendations of the Jenkins report to ensure that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful workplaces for all.

There is so much more from the Jenkins report that will be implemented and that is being worked through by people on all sides of this place. The Member for Moreton also reflected that we cannot do our jobs without our staff. I'm lucky to have a wonderful electorate office who have supported me incredibly well through my time here. I know the challenges they face; we all know the challenges they face. They often have people on the phone who can be aggressive, can be abusive, can be rude, and they have to deal with that. They have people presenting them with distressing issues. People might be suicidal. People might have had terrible life catastrophes that they then turn to us to seek help for. We know that the hours for our staff are a huge challenge as well, as I've already reflected on. So I do want to acknowledge the incredible work our staff do and that we have a lot more to do. I do believe that this is a bipartisan approach on making sure that this place is as safe for our staff as possible.

I was pleased to see that the multiparty Leadership Taskforce has been established. They have an independent expert chair, and we have members and senators from across all parties, which again means that staff across the board will be looked after and be front of mind for all of the members and senators involved in the Leadership Taskforce. We are also undertaking a comprehensive review of the MOP(S) Act, consistent with recommendation 18 of the Jenkins report, which will conclude in September 2022.

At the start of last week, on the first day of our sitting, we had the statement of acknowledgment, which was recommendation 1 of the report. It was delivered by presiding officers in both chambers. I was very pleased to be here in this chamber on the first sitting day to hear the Speaker, Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, Leader of the Nationals, Deputy Prime Minister, Leader of the Greens and the crossbench also apologise and acknowledge the unacceptable history of workplace bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. I do note that this was not just an apology and acknowledgment to staff but also to members and senators as well.

Every person should feel safe and respected in their workplace. Personally, I'm someone who has not felt either of these things for a range of reasons, but unfortunately that is mainly because of the behaviour of the left, whether it was GetUp, Labor, the unions or Extinction Rebellion, who targeted my electorate office a number of times in increasing intensity that made me and my staff feel very unsafe. Unfortunately, there are some junior and senior men who are supporters of the left, I guess you could say, who have behaved in completely unacceptable ways towards me as well. All of this started in the lead-up to the 2019 election and hasn't stopped since, and, as such, I do believe I have a better understanding than most about what it is to be targeted, to be attacked and to feel unsafe in your workplace. Whether it was out and about in my electorate or sitting at my desk in the electorate office, it's not just the physical confrontations, it is the absolutely disgraceful, hateful online abuse that particularly comes at women in public roles—not just me but so many other women in public roles—and you can't stop it, because it's online. I'll have a lot more to say about this in the next couple of days.

I just want to add my voice to those who have said that they are deeply sorry and regretful, as I am, that there are so many other women, staff, MPs and senators in this place who have felt unsafe doing their jobs. The statement of acknowledgment demonstrates that it's unacceptable for anyone in this place to expect or accept abusive, harassing, offensive or dangerous conduct. I think our bipartisan message to everyone, especially our staff, is: You don't have to suffer in silence. It is time to speak up. We'll support you to do so and to help us achieve the change that we need to achieve.

I really want to sincerely thank everyone who's participated in the Jenkins review. I think that thanks to this review this place can become a best-practice workplace and model for a positive, respectful workplace and for positive, respectful working relationships. I hope that every single member and senator in this place is going to do all they can to ensure that this is the case.

I'm very mindful of the Speaker's words earlier, but I do want to particularly acknowledge Ms Brittany Higgins for being the catalyst for this report and for the change that we are seeing. I know her matter is before the courts, so, although I was going to make some further remarks, I won't. What I do want to say is that the Jenkins report goes to so many issues that will take a long time to resolve in this place, but I do believe that we will ensure that this becomes a much, much safer workplace for everyone.

It really does break my heart that we have young women who have terrible experiences as staff in this place. I worked here in 2008 and 2009 in the Leader of the Opposition's office, and I worked in the South Australian Leader of the Opposition's office and for a shadow minister in SA as well. I spent a lot of time working in parliament and a lot of time travelling, and I can absolutely say that I never felt unsafe. I was never singled out as a woman, targeted as a woman or attacked as a woman. I had a wonderful experience. That experience and the learning I acquired whilst a member of staff really set me up for the rest of my career. So it does break my heart to see all of the female staff who haven't had those experiences. That's why, in part—but also because of the things that have happened to me—I will continue, including after I've left this place, to ensure in any way I can that we all work together to make sure that our federal parliament is the safest place it can possibly be for women, whatever their role might be here, and also for parliamentarians and staff across the board.

I'm really proud of what our government has done and what Prime Minister Scott Morrison has done and the leadership that he has provided which has seen us make so many changes already. Those changes probably don't get nearly enough acknowledgment. I certainly understand them because, again, they've impacted me personally. We have, of course, this bill before us today. We've had the Jenkins report and the Foster report. We've implemented many of the recommendations of the Respect@Work report. We have changed the Electoral Act to make it safer for all candidates and sitting MPs, particularly in a campaign situation, which is absolutely critical to making sure that the Australian people continue to have free and easy access to their elected representatives. I do not want us to turn into a country where you have to book an appointment with your MP or senator to see them. I want us to stay the place where you can run into us doing a listening post at the shops. That's if members and senators are anything like I was during my time as the member for Boothby. I did hundreds and hundreds of street corner listening posts and mobile offices in parks and on roadsides around my electorate. When we take that away or if we say, 'No you can't see us in person at all because it's too dangerous,' then we lose the essence of our democracy.

I thank the Prime Minister for the Online Safety Act, and I also acknowledge the Prime Minister and the minister for communications for their leadership. In the next day or so, we will be debating the anti-trolling bill. These are the ways that we make it safer for all MPs and senators to be able to do their jobs—particularly women, because, in the online space, the hateful, disgusting, disgraceful abuse that is sexist and misogynistic and is being aimed at women is completely unacceptable. Our government has started to act on this, but there is much, much more that we need to do, and I will be one of the people on the front line making sure we have these changes implemented.

I'm pleased to give Labor's support to the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. In making these remarks, I'm very mindful of the comments made by the Speaker about the conduct of this debate, and I urge all members, if they missed those comments, to go back and have a look at them. There's a lot at stake in making sure that we conduct this debate correctly.

Last Wednesday, the parliament and party leaders made clear that a new standard is required. That statement of acknowledgment was in response to the first recommendation of Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins from her review into the Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, Set the standard. This bill aims to implement further recommendations from the review in relation to the employment of members of parliament staff. The review's findings were shocking but, unfortunately, for many not surprising.

Labor has sought to take meaningful action on the issues raised not only by the Jenkins review but also by the Foster review and by people who have shared their stories. Rather than playing politics with these serious issues, we need to be committed to addressing them in a consultative way, to make this workplace a safe one. Last year, the Labor caucus resolved to work towards implementation of each and every recommendation of Commissioner Jenkins. We've sought to engage with the government constructively on implementation, and we are genuinely committed to the process, because we want a better outcome for our staff. Making this workplace safe is an issue that's too important to play politics with.

There's a commonly held view that the unfair dismissal provisions in the Fair Work Act don't apply to MOP(S) Act staff—a view that is not correct but has developed over many years based on the lived experience of staff. So this bill seeks to implement recommendation 17 of the Jenkins review: that the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act be amended to make clear that the Fair Work Act applies and that staff are covered by unfair dismissal laws.

We know the lack of job security for parliamentarians' staff is a major barrier to staff raising complaints. This lack of job security results in a power imbalance which itself makes it easier for bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault to occur and harder for complainants to speak up. Not only can staff lose their jobs because of an election, a reshuffle or a leadership change, but it was a common concern of participants in the Jenkins review that staff could be sacked because their parliamentarian had 'lost trust or confidence' in them, which may well have a whole context behind it, based on these other issues.

In Set the standard, the Human Rights Commission noted that the ability of parliamentarians to dismiss their staff if they have lost trust or confidence in them is not an express legal right that arises either under the MOP(S) Act, in the enterprise agreement or in employment contracts, yet this is one of the reasons for dismissal given on the Department of Finance's termination-of-employment form. That box on that form makes it seem as though an employee has no recourse even if that is the reason provided for termination. So the review also recommended:

Labor had concerns that it was not clear from the bill or from the original explanatory memorandum that the written notice of termination provided for in the bill is anything more than the ticking of a box on a form. As the review noted, while loss of confidence or trust may be a valid reason for termination, the Fair Work Commission has held

… merely advising an employee that they are being dismissed for 'loss of trust or confidence', or asserting such loss is not, of itself, enough to show a valid reason for dismissal. Rather, there must be 'sufficient evidence and reasoning to support this loss of trust and confidence'.

Labor has committed to implementing the recommendations from the Jenkins review. To do so properly, this legislation needs to be clear that making an unsubstantiated claim of a loss of trust or confidence is not enough to justify a termination. If that isn't clear, it can't be said this bill is fully implementing Commissioner Jenkins's recommendation.

We're pleased that the government has agreed to amend the explanatory memorandum to provide the necessary clarification and that this could be done without us moving amendments to the bill that would have delayed the implementation. It's incumbent now on the Department of Finance to update its guidance and its termination-of-employment form to reflect the findings of the review and this legislation. Labor has always supported the principle that you shouldn't lose your job without a proper reason. In fact, the first unfair dismissal laws were introduced by Labor governments. The changes in this bill will help provide some comfort to staff that they're protected by legislation if they have been unfairly dismissed.

The bill also implements paragraph (c) of recommendation 17 of the review, to clarify that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to parliamentarians in their capacity—our capacity—as employers. Finally, the bill implements recommendation 24, to amend the Disability Discrimination Act and Age Discrimination Act to clarify that those acts apply to staff of members of parliament.

These are simple fixes which will help provide greater security for staff and highlight to parliamentarians their obligations—our obligations—as employers. We still have a long way to go to implement all the recommendations and the measures necessary to make this workplace safer not just for parliamentarians' staff but for everyone who works here. Labor is committed to this process and to working collaboratively with all parties to make sure that change does indeed happen. I commend the bill to the House.

I'm pleased to rise to speak on the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 and the report Set the standard from the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces. I want to start by quoting Commissioner Kate Jenkins from the report itself for the House and for those listening:

This is an opportunity for the leaders of our country to transform Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces to become what they already should be: workplaces where expected standards of behaviour are modelled, championed and enforced, where respectful behaviour is rewarded and in which any Australian, no matter their gender, race, sexual orientation, disability status or age, feels safe and welcome to contribute. By acting on this Report this Parliament has the unique chance to leave an historic legacy for future generations of people working in the Parliament and, through them, for all Australians.

This aim is an important one, because it is only by reflecting the whole of Australian society, and living up to community expectations, that Parliament can perform its function in a representative democracy: making good decisions that will positively impact Australian society. The recommendations in this Report are designed to make the Australian Parliament the sort of workplace and institution in which Australians can be rightly proud.

This is a very, very sensitive topic. It is an issue that so many Australians across the country have faced—employees, particularly women—for generations: being safe at work. I, like the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Boothby have expressed, am deeply troubled and indeed very sorry for any person not just in this place but across our great nation who has been in situations where they have been improperly treated.

We have a great responsibility here in this place to set the standard, and that is exactly what our government is doing. I, along with the member for Boothby, will be honest in this place and say that I have never felt unsafe doing my job here in Australia's parliament. I've never felt unsafe in my office and I can vouch for the environment in my own office that I have created for all my staff, no matter their gender, no matter their age, no matter their sexuality and, I must also say, no matter their gender identity. I would hope that Australians believe me when I say I have done my best in my office—as we all need to do across our parliament—to make sure my employees feel safe.

The government is indeed implementing recommendations to make sure our staff across the parliament can lead the way in terms of their safety in this place. This bill implements two recommendations from the Jenkins report: recommendation 17, which amends the MOP(S) Act for employees; and recommendation 24, which amends the Age Discrimination Act. The bill will amend the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 to strengthen and clarify the employment rights of MOP(S) Act employees. In particular, this bill would implement recommendation 17, as I said, of the report, amending the MOP(S) Act to make it clear that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to MOP(S) Act employees. While this has always been the case, this bill will remove any doubt by making this explicit, amending the MOP(S) Act to require parliamentarian to provide reasons when they dismiss an employee from employment. This recognises that employees have a right to know why they have been dismissed and ensures dismissals under the MOP(S) Act follow best practice. The bill is amending the WHS Act to clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for the purposes of the Work Health and Safety Act.

The Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 provide important frameworks to protect against discrimination in the workplace and to encourage diversity. The bill would amend the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to clarify that these laws apply to persons employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act to put beyond doubt that these employees have protection from age and disability discrimination. These amendments to the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 implement recommendation 24 of the Jenkins report and will bring these acts in line with amendments made to the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 in 2021.

This bill builds on the work that has already been taken to progress and implement the report's recommendations and make Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces safe and respectful for all participants. This is something that our country needs across a broad range of workplaces and more. This is not a problem in our country confined just to workplaces; this is a problem across our country in the homes and lives of Australians, particularly women. This is a serious matter for our country, and I, for one, am pleased that this has come up for debate in our country, in our parliament. Of course, I'm sorry for the individuals who have been hurt in this place and who have had to play out in the media very private matters. That is never easy. And so I'm proud that our government is standing up for the rights of those in this place and improving and making sure we have a better Australia for all.

My wife, Jess, and I met working in this building. Shared values led to a shared life together. Overall, for both of us, a lot of good came from our time working here—although we couldn't quite bring ourselves to name our son 'Kevin'! Jess left politics for corporate Australia and her career is better for it—HR departments, performance reviews, whistleblower mechanisms, professional development opportunities, diversity metrics and reporting to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. For Jess and I, it is particularly painful to know that not everyone has had a positive experience working in this place.

Every parliamentarian should be proud to say they work in Parliament House. This legislation is one small step towards earning that pride and respect back. I want to thank the many people, especially women, who came forward and participated in the Jenkins review. The truth is that many felt they couldn't directly contribute to the review. It is unreasonable to expect everyone to feel that they can speak out to suit a particular review's timeline. There will be more stories and truths to be told over this year and over coming years. For those that are still sitting on the sidelines, waiting to see if we are serious and if our words match our actions, we need to win your trust back.

To those of you who have been strong enough to speak out, I say thank you. True patriotism is not waving a flag or yelling a chant until you are red in the face. Patriotism is looking at your country and knowing where and how it must be improved, sometimes at huge personal cost. Because of your efforts, because you spoke out, we have Set the standard: report on the independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. This has provided a clear road map of practical and achievable reforms. Last week in this place the Prime Minister and the opposition leader said sorry, and I, too, am sorry. As leaders in this place, every single member of parliament has not just the obligation to set the standard but also an obligation to raise the standard. Even with this report and this bill, the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022, I feel that we need to do more to raise the standard.

I look at the challenges my staff face on a daily basis: dealing with hateful emails, disgusting and inappropriate content sent through social media to official channels, and an increasing sense of hate, anger, and violence in how people choose to engage with their democracy. I know that some members felt unsafe here in Canberra over the weekend, and I would just ask people: imagine for a moment that you felt unsafe and disrespected in this building every single day. That, it is clear from this report, is how some people feel about this workplace. Staff should be able to walk into this building feeling safe, respected and valued, every single day. For too long, that has not been the case. I have worked in this building as a senior staff member and served as a party secretary, and I am now in this place as a member. I know, like all of you, that not every person who works in this building is a good human being. But I've also worked in this building with some brilliant and dedicated people.

So much of the conversation that has occurred around parliamentary workplace culture is about those who choose to drag the culture down, those who assault or intimidate—those who should never be close to power. It's for that reason I also want to pause and pay tribute to those in this place who work for the public good, people who work harder in these roles than they will at any other time in their career, people who think through complex policy changes on behalf of the nation and who simply want to support good parliamentarians creating good policy in building a greater country. Because, whatever your politics, most people come here with a sense of purpose and a desire to serve. To those who do that, and to those who come here and raise the standard, I say thank you. To those who provide support in the workplace for others who may find it tough here at times, I say thank you. To those who make this a workplace that I love and that I know is an honour for so many of us to serve in, I say thank you. I also know that, over the course of this process, my own staff have felt at times that it's been tough for them to engage in this process and see things said about their workplace, as we go through this very difficult discussion, and so I also want to thank them for all of their work and support of me as a parliamentarian.

I felt I couldn't speak on this without consulting some of those people that I've worked with in this building. Indeed, I started with my wife, who gave me a fair chunk of this speech, and I thank Jess for that, in terms of her counsel. But I also spoke to a range of other people who have worked in this building over many decades. All of their comments had the same theme: implement all the recommendations, no cherry picking, act quickly. And this quote: 'What is the point of power, or even sitting in Parliament House making legislation, if we don't exercise that to effect real change?' And I think we all know that that is now the test for all of us, as we begin to legislate on this.

This bill does one piece of the work: it starts the process of lifting the culture and the workplace experience of every one of the 270 electorate offices and of Parliament House. Like many, I put in a submission to the Jenkins review recommending further steps that I believe would improve workplace culture and professionalism. There is a lot of work to do. This bill is one step in that journey. The bill addresses recommendation 17 and recommendation 24 of the Jenkins review. If passed, this legislation will introduce a requirement to give reasons for termination of a staff member under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act. It will also offer protections for staff under the Work Health and Safety Act, the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. It's about time that we do that.

The other test on us is not how much legislation there is or how many committees there are. The test is: does the culture change? We see week on week in this place that that is a very tough piece of work for us to do. If we talk about the culture that is highlighted in this report, every time I pick the report up I am struck by how honest people were about the culture. I'm struck by some of the ways that people have felt very aggrieved by the culture that does permeate through this place, and throughout the electorate offices and ministerial offices of the country. I will quote from the report, which says that there is a culture of:

…   …   …

…   …   …

…   …   …

…   …   …

None of this is acceptable, but all of this is true about this workplace, and it has to change. One quote from one person who submitted to the review that struck me as sadly true and appalling was this:

a real culture of gossiping about young female employees … who they're sleeping with … whether they're having an affair, whether a perfectly innocent friendship is actually an affair … I think it's really upsetting for a lot of those young female employees that they can't just be judged on their work, and that there's always this sort of subtext of who they're sleeping with.

That's for the young women employees in this place. Then, when women get older, we have this:

… environment where working parents, and specifically working mothers, are not welcomed and accepted …

That isn't good enough. We've taken some steps in the right direction in this place, steps such as those towards turning bars into childcare centres. The childcare centre is one that my children have used and that many parents in this place use, and I note the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition on this matter over a number of years.

But, as I said, the cultural problem of this building that we are seeking to address isn't just of Parliament House; it is also of the electorate offices, and they are located in every state and territory, so this is a national cultural problem. It is not one that is constrained or is simply a Canberra bubble challenge, so I would say to those who are involved in leadership positions in state and territory governments and in the parliaments of the states and the territories that they also should read this report. They should also make sure that they are taking proactive preventive steps so that a cultural problem that we know is here does not exist anywhere else, because the culture in Canberra is simply a melting pot of the cultures of the various states and territories.

I know a lot of the public would be wondering why we're spending so much time talking about the staff of politicians. The Australian people could fairly ask why we are focusing only on this. The answer is clear: if we can't protect those whom we work with most closely, how on earth can the Australian people have faith in us to legislate to protect them? Parliament must be about setting the highest standard, and then we must lift the entire nation up to that standard.

At times I've been struck by the fact that the standards in this building have been lower than the standards in other workplaces that I have worked in throughout my life. I am thinking about one of my first jobs as a student, when I was a shift manager at McDonald's. At 18 years of age, I had to write someone up and give them a written warning for sexual harassment in the workplace. They had harassed another shift member. I'd never had to do that before, but the process was so crystal clear. There was a form. There was a process to follow through. There were check-in points for the staff member who had been harassed, and it was resolved to their satisfaction. It just strikes me that, if we could have processes that you could follow when I was an 18-year-old working at Macca's, surely we could finally be on the path here in this building to improving the processes of our place.

What I want for my electorate is for people to look here and see that we are setting that high standard in how we treat one another, we're doing our best and we're lifting the entire nation up, whatever people's background, sex, gender identity or how they choose to express themselves. So we can't just tidy up our own workplace. That would be too insular, too narrow-minded. But today we are talking about legislation that does seek to protect people in this workplace. This is a good step, a step in the right direction. I commend the legislation and I look forward to working with members across the chamber to make sure we do much more work on this.

The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 is an important turning point for this parliament. I begin this speech by acknowledging the work of the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins—the seven months of very deep engagement with all of us in this House and indeed, many hundreds of former employees of the House. More than 1,700 individuals made contributions to this review, the second Jenkins review. Some 33 organisations made contributions. There were 935 survey responses, 490 interviews conducted and 320 written submissions, with an additional 11 focus groups.

It was a very busy seven months for the Sex Discrimination Commissioner. I want to honour her work but pay tribute also to each and every one of those 1,723 people who contributed to this review in some way, shape or form. My message to you is that I will work every day in this parliament, as I know my Labor colleagues will, to ensure that the pain and trauma you experienced, which was expressed in this report, will never be in vain. There will be a very firm commitment to make the Australian parliament a place we are all proud to work in and a model employer for the nation.

As the member for Perth rightly pointed out, we're not just talking about the almost 5,000 people who work on a sitting day in this building; we're also talking about the 151 electorate offices that are scattered around Australia, each employing staff, and the senators' offices throughout the states and territories. There are a lot of people that work here or come into contact with the parliament—through lobbying efforts, media people working in the building, the cleaners. Everybody should be able to come to this place and expect they'll be treated in a respectful manner and that, if there are issues, clear processes and remedies are in place for people to seek redress. This is 2022. Probably the most astonishing thing about this report is that it's taken this long to get here.

My Labor colleagues were very keen to be involved in the lead-up to this report—talking to our staff and encouraging people to make contributions. I thank the Labor caucus for the strong support gained in this process. Last Tuesday—or was it on Wednesday—we had the implementation of the very first recommendation, the statement of acknowledgment, in this House. Whilst I am delighted that that happened sooner rather than later, I want to put on record just how disappointed I was that there wasn't care taken to ensure that that statement of acknowledgment was the best it could be. I'm not suggesting that the words were insufficient in any way, but the fact is that more than 1,700 people contributed to this review, bearing their lived experience to this parliament, and they were not advised, let alone invited, to attend the statement of acknowledgment. My staff, like all of our staff, probably found out after the fact, unless we as members were ringing them up beforehand, as I did, to say, 'You should watch this; I'd be interested to know how you respond.' That was a missed opportunity for this parliament, and we really have to start doing things better.

I am delighted that the task force has finally met. This report came down in November. The task force met on 7 February, I think, or it might have been 2 February. There was some delay in doing so, but the task force is now in place. I acknowledge some of the discussion in this chamber last week when the member for Warringah, followed by the member for Chifley, raised questions asking the Speaker to examine—given the commitment we had just made to ensuring that this place would be a safe, respectful workplace—the impact of extremely long sittings on staff and other people who work in this House. I note that the chair has reflected again on his answer, and I am very pleased to hear that, because the role of the Presiding Officer is absolutely critical to the implementation of all the recommendations in this report. There are a number of recommendations. I'm thinking in particular of recommendations 2, 9, 10 and 16, which are not the subject of the bill before us but absolutely demonstrate the critical role not just of each and every one of us in this parliament but of the Presiding Officers in ensuring that we live up to setting the standard in this place.

I am very pleased that we have before us a bill that will seek to implement recommendations 17 and 24 of this review, and I know that my colleague the member for Watson outlined those commitments. They're important changes to clarify that the Fair Work Act does in fact apply to our staff, as do the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. They're important pieces of legislation.

But I tell you what: this nation is watching us for what we do. The time for words has long passed. There is a whole generation of Australian women now refusing to remain silent, sit back and just listen to our speeches. They have told us loud and clear—the thousands who marched on the front lawns of this Parliament House and each and every brave woman who has stood to recount her experiences of sexual harassment, assault, abuse and bullying—that words alone will change nothing. If you did not get that message from the National Press Club last week, you are deaf. It is abundantly clear that words will not ensure that women and children are safe from violence and abuse. Words will not improve access to justice. They won't ensure that our workplaces, homes and public places are safe. Words won't deliver a better future—not even better words. The only way we get to secure a better future is through action.

As I said, the time for talking is well and truly done. We need our leaders to be bold, brave, and determined to embrace decisive action. For all of us as individuals, employees, leaders, parents and citizens in this place, the moment to be bold and determined and to demand reform is right now. We cannot lose this moment in our history. It is incumbent on each of us, and I know that everyone in Australia is watching this parliament very closely right now. I will be standing here, holding this government to account every waking moment of my days in this parliament. You don't get to walk away like you did with the Respect@Work report, and dud us and only implement half the recommendations. We on this side of the House are absolutely committed to working for the implementation of each and every one of these regulations.

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.

Last weekend at Parliament House, thousands of people, including constituents of Wide Bay, peacefully protested against vaccine mandates responsible for sacking teachers, roadworkers, police and nurses.

The convoy to Canberra was the largest protest anyone had seen at Parliament House for any issue in decades. The people I spoke to were hardworking Australians from far and wide who had lost their livelihoods, careers, decades of hard work and dedication, and their social lives to state government health orders. We had thousands more people expressing their democratic right to peaceful protest than on any other hot-button issue of late, but with far fewer arrests. They did not engage in destructive behaviour or vandalism at Parliament House or put themselves in danger. Much smaller protests, such as Blockade Australia and Extinction Rebellion, get more mainstream media attention for their causes by breaking the law. They vandalise the parliament with spray paint, set prams on fire, block bridges, trespass on private property and glue themselves to roads and parliament furnishings.

Many came out to condemn the convoy, but peaceful protest and freedom of assembly are fundamental tenets of democracy in Australia. Other countries are re-employing people who were stood down over their vaccine mandates, and it's time the states gave our workers their jobs back.

[by video link] No doubt the last two years have been challenging. But, in the spirit of optimism, I would also like to think that they've presented some opportunities. One of those is a chance to reflect on what we value as a society—a recalibration of what's important to us.

Today, thousands of nurses are striking in NSW. Nurses and healthcare workers have been praised throughout the pandemic as the frontline heroes in the fight against COVID. But, given that status, what does the fact that they're out there striking say about how we treat our heroes? We can stand here in this parliament and praise them all we like, but the fact is that our words don't improve their patient ratio and our words, without action, don't take the stress and anguish off their shoulders. They are only words and tokenism at best.

Nurses aren't demanding change for themselves. They are doing it because they understand and they know, and they fear for the safety of their patients. I stand next to those nurses as they demand better conditions for themselves in order to deliver better conditions for their patients. Any government that ignores the pleas of nurses today does so at their own peril.

Everyone's favourite, Darwin's daily newspaper, the NT News, has turned 70. The NT News is known for its crocodiles on the front pages and its tasteful headlines, but it was a sombre first edition in 1952 that reported the death of King George VI and the accession to the throne of his daughter, Elizabeth. In 1955, legendary editor Jim Bowditch took the reins. He was a decorated World War II veteran. He was a fearless campaigner for the rights of workers, First Nations people and the powerless against the powerful. He lasted 18 years, winning two Walkley Awards. New Zealander John Hogan was editor for 14 years and is fondly remembered for giving many young Territorians a chance to enter the newspaper profession.

You never know where you will bump into a former NT News journo. They might be the managing editor of the Daily Telegraph in Sydney or running a school in East Timor. They might be working at the local motor vehicle registry or even receiving a medal for gallantry from the Governor-General, as Frank Alcorta did a couple of years ago. They all have war stories to tell about their time at the NT News, but there are few that can be mentioned in this place, so I'll just say: happy birthday, NT News. You've been reigning as long as the Queen.

Delivering funding for projects for the people of Nicholls right across the community is one of the highlights that we all have as local members. Major projects often overshadow local projects, but securing funding in partnership with local governments to deliver projects that drive local economic development is just as important, like supporting tourism. The Regional Jobs and Investment Packages have seen this government partner with the Moira Shire, local businesses and Goulburn Murray Water by providing $2.7 million towards the $6.3 million Yarrawonga Tourism Trail, which is five kilometres long along Lake Mulwala.

Next Saturday week I'll be attending the opening of stage 2 of the Dookie Rail Trail, also funded through RJIP in partnership with the City of Greater Shepparton. The project extends the existing trail by 3.1 kilometres to connect with the former Dookie railway station.

Prior to Christmas I also had the opportunity to open the initial stage of the Murray River Adventure Trail, linking Yarrawonga to Burramine. This $1.3 million, 13.5-kilometre trail was delivered in partnership with the Moira Shire by the Murray-Darling Basin Economic Development Program.

I'm proud to announce that this week the Campaspe Shire has received $1.5 million for the Murchison to Rushworth Rail Trail via the Black Summer Bushfire Recovery Grants. Certainly it's great to be able to see the National Party delivering while we're in government for regional Australia in these programs.

Businesses in my electorate have been doing it tough during the pandemic. Hammered by lockdowns over the past two years, they are now trying to overcome the omicron outbreak that has set them back yet again, but this time it's worse, with little to no federal government support and no available rapid antigen tests for staff.

I spoke to a local bookshop owner, Matt Davis, who summed up the mood of many local businesspeople when he said: 'If my wife and I ran our bookshop like the Morrison government runs the country, we'd be out of business.' From the lack of RATs over the peak period of the omicron outbreak to the continued shadow lockdown and a lack of federal government support, businesses in my electorate are really struggling to make ends meet, let alone remain profitable.

Omicron has been worse this year with the lockdowns for many businesses. With little financial support from the federal government, these businesses are struggling to stay afloat. JobKeeper has ended and the financial pain for businesses has not. Businesses had been looking to recoup losses over the summer period, and yet they are about to shut their doors because they have not been able to have staff there and haven't been able to test them with rapid antigen tests. State and territory governments have stepped in and offered to supply packages for businesses during the omicron wave. The Morrison government is again missing in action. People in my electorate have done the right thing—we're wearing masks, we've been vaccinated, we've homeschooled our kids—and we need help from the government.

Everybody loves a first, and that's why it was great to recently announce, alongside defence minister, Peter Dutton, that Cairns would be the home for the first Defence regional maintenance centre. This is something I've been working towards now for quite a few years, and I'm proud to have delivered it for my community.

The five-year, $70 million contract was awarded to local consortium NORSTA Maritime, a joint venture between two local shipyards, the Tropical Reef Shipyard and Norship Marine. The investment will ensure that Cairns can further build on its reputation as a leading marine maintenance and sustainability hub in northern Australia and in the Pacific.

Creating a consistent pipeline of naval sustainment work at the Cairns Marine Precinct will also provide long-term opportunities for local industry, ensuring that businesses have the confidence to invest and develop their facilities and workplaces. But, more importantly, as more naval ships are maintained in Cairns, more defence industry personnel will be required, which will be further support for the long-term local jobs to diversify our economy. It will also give confidence to local youngsters seeking training and a career in maritime technical trades to remain here in Cairns.

Finally, I would like to take the opportunity to acknowledge Norship Marine's CEO, Olav Groot, and Tropical Reef Shipyard's director, Robert Downing, whose work behind the scenes was absolutely critical in securing Defence's first regional maintenance centre. (Time expired)

It was a dark and shameful day in Australia's history on 11 February 2022. It was the day that koalas were officially listed as an endangered species on the east coast of Australia. Since 2001, 50 per cent of Queensland's koala population has been lost. It's even worse in New South Wales, where 65 per cent of the koala population has been decimated during the same time frame. As my friend the member for Macarthur would say while fighting for his own urban koala population, 'To this government all koalas may be equal, but some koala populations seem to be more equal than others.' Without urgent government intervention at every level, koalas could become extinct by 2050.

And while the Morrison government will respond to this by rolling out a new koala task force or some sort of furry bandaid solution, we know that their national recovery plan for koalas is already six years overdue. And we know that the greatest threat to koalas is actually climate change and the catastrophic natural events that accompany it. Extreme droughts, extreme bushfires have decimated koala habitats over the last decade. Three years ago Australia became the first country to lose a mammal to climate change. I said in my first speech that the extinction of the bramble cay melomys would change nothing, and that has proven true. Three years on, eight years into this coalition government, they have dug in their heels acting on climate change, and now our beloved koalas stand in danger. Shame on you all.

I rise today to acknowledge Northern Beaches local Mr Jean-Philippe Brianchon, and commend his passion for building strong local communities. Jean-Philippe is an experienced IT professional and has launched an app called SwapAnHour, where people can exchange an hour of their time for an hour of someone else's. The app has been designed to help members of the community help each other and, unlike typical gig apps, there is no money involved. Instead, users can bank time. The app is based on kindness and doesn't consider the market value of assistance provided. Whether you're walking your neighbour's dog or providing IT assistance, if you help for an hour, you're entitled to an hour's help.

Jean-Philippe had the idea of SwapAnHour 20 years ago. After witnessing the generosity of his local community firsthand when his partner lost her battle with cancer, he was inspired to finally develop it. The app now has over 1,500 swappers, offering services from energy healing to copywriting. The app also now includes a functionality for borrowing household goods and donating unwanted items. Rather than simply building a business through his innovation, Jean-Philippe is building a community. And we in Mackellar, on the Northern Beaches, are proud to call him one of our own.

The ongoing humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan is devastating, and I thank the government for the cooperation and efforts made in assisting with the initial evacuation efforts. I've had the privilege of meeting some of the female athletes who were evacuated in those initial days and weeks, but unfortunately—for them, and for their family and friends who were left behind—the barriers to evacuation are increasing as the country descends further into crisis. I urge the government to offer greater assistance and hope for these separated families.

I also would like to draw attention to the case of refugees and asylum seekers who continue to languish in alternative places of detention, including the Park Hotel in Melbourne. Many constituents wrote to me during the Novak Djokovic saga in January, calling out for a more humanitarian approach. These people are languishing in the same hotel. Mehdi Ali, who fled persecution as a 15-year-old boy, has been detained for nine years, and says:

I don't know what is going to happen tomorrow. You might let me out, you might send me somewhere else, the staff might come to my room and take my belongings. Anything might happen …

I urge the government to end this absurdity. We sing our Australian anthem with pride—'for those who come across the sea'—

Oh, and we have the pettiness coming here. End the abuse. Let them go. Raise the standard in this place.

Today we commemorate the 80th anniversary of the fall of Singapore during the Second World War, one of the worst military disasters in Australian British history. Some 15,000 Australians were taken prisoner by the Japanese when British and Commonwealth forces surrendered on 15 February 1942.

The member for Bowman is warned.

They were held first at Changi, and later at other locations across South-East Asia and Japan. These prisoners of war endured great suffering, and by the end of the war more than 7,000 had died in captivity.

Singapore was home to a British naval base with a large force stationed on the island that included many who had been evacuated after serving in Malaya. On 8 February 1942, Japanese forces began their attack on the island from the north-west. While the fighting was intense, the battle was short-lived. Japanese forces seized control of the island's main water reservoirs. Soon after, the allied forces, disorganised and lacking supplies and air support, were forced to surrender.

Four days after the fall of Singapore, Japan bombed Darwin, bringing the war to the Australian mainland for the first time. As Labor Prime Minister John Curtin said, 'The battle for Australia had begun.' These events stunned the nation. Today we recognise the sacrifice and service of all those people who served in Malaya and Singapore. Lest we forget.

Today is the final day of festivities that mark the Chinese new year. The lunar new year is a big event in my electorate, as we have some of the largest Chinese and Korean diasporas in Australia. Today is the Chinese Lantern Festival, which features lion dances, fireworks and, of course, lanterns.

The last two years have seen muted celebrations, for obvious reasons. But this year, the party was back in Eastwood. I was delighted to attend a number of events. We held a lion dance two weeks ago, at the beginning of festivities. We walked around Eastwood with dancers and red envelopes, all organised by my dear friend Tony Tang. It was great to see Eastwood festivities roaring back to life.

Later that week, I joined the member for Reid, the Prime Minister, a host of MPs and local Chinese and Korean residents as we celebrated the new year with a traditional feast. On the weekend, I joined the newly elected mayor, Jordan Lane, for the council celebration organised by Dr Felix Lowe.

Eastwood has traditionally been one of Bennelong's busiest hubs, and the lunar new year festivities have been among its greatest attractions. COVID hit the area badly. Many shops remain boarded. But this last fortnight has shown that our spirit remains unbroken and recovery is on track.

The chronically ill and disabled are being left behind in the rat race imposed on us by the Morrison government. Vulnerable Australians are being forced into hiding at home, and lower income workers are skipping meals because of the cost of rapid COVID tests. My office is being contacted repeatedly by people in genuine need, but they do not qualify as concession cardholders. Take the example of constituent Monica of Bomaderry, who was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis and unable to keep working. Pending an application for NDIS support, she does not qualify for a healthcare card.

In a joint statement on the need for free and accessible rapid antigen tests to protect public health and the economy, the Australian Council of Social Services said:

Rapid Antigen Tests are an essential tool in managing this pandemic and stopping the spread of the virus, allowing us to keep COVID-19 out of homes, workplaces and public venues.

No-one should be excluded from getting a rapid antigen test. Our health system is based upon the principle of Medicare—that people get the health care they need when they require it.

Local businesses and workers need access to free rapid antigen tests. They have been through so much, and the government needs to support them. It's just not good enough. The government must act urgently to provide free and accessible rapid antigen tests to keep our communities safe from the virus.

Aged-care services in my electorate continue to be in great demand due to our ageing population. I am pleased to inform House that, due to strong advocacy, the level of recurrent funding for residential aged care, home care, short-term restorative care, transition care and the Commonwealth Home Support Program has increased by more than $10 million annually within the Moore electorate over the last three years.

Under the Morrison government, annual funding has increased from $61 million in 2018-19 to $71.5 million in 2020-21. As of 30 June 2021, there were 444 residential aged-care places, 16 short-term restorative care places and 121 transition care places, bringing the total number of places funded in my electorate to 581. However, I am aware that many families in my electorate have family members on waiting lists for aged-care services, so I am focused on ensuring that the level of recurrent aged-care funding continues to increase. Additional funding for operational places and homecare packages will enable more purpose-built aged-care facilities to be developed, such as those currently under construction in Kinross and Currambine and other modern facilities planned at Joondalup, Edgewater and Burns Beach. (Time expired)

At home in Moorooka, on my daily walk, I meander through Toohey Forest, lovely bushland just 10 kilometres from the CBD. So I was very pleased to hear koalas have now been listed as endangered by the federal environment minister. The coalition accepted the recommendation of the Threatened Species Scientific Committee that the koala populations of Queensland, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory have their conservation status upgraded. I welcome the upgraded protection status of koalas, but this national recovery plan was due in 2015. It's now 2022. It's now six years overdue. When will Australians see a recovery plan for our beloved koalas?

When Labor was last in government, the environment minister listed koala populations in Queensland as vulnerable under national environment law. We also put in place the national koala conservation and management strategy, the one the coalition didn't bother to renew. Over the past decade, koala populations have been decimated by bushfires and loss of habitat and smashed by climate change. I'm especially concerned about our koala populations because we have a population in Toohey Forest—not that I see them very often—and I'm committed to securing a koala bridge over Toohey Road to let our koalas move between the two patches of Toohey Forest. It is not a cheap project, but a national icon like the koala is definitely worth preserving.

There is something very big happening in the town of Goombungee, the picnic town.

Honourable members interjecting—

Absolutely. What a great name to say—Goombungee. The picnic town is experiencing something of a revival, with new business owners are taking over the local cafe and pub. The new publican of the Pioneer Arms Hotel, Tom Gaslevich, started off his working life washing dishes in the pub. His hope and dream was to one day save up enough money to be able to buy the pub and run it himself. A little challenge he had was money. Thankfully, in our wonderful region we have the New Acland Coal Mine right there on hand. That provided him with a fantastic job and the ability to slowly but surely save up money so that he could one day pay for his dream. When the mine was, sadly, brought to an end—the last coal was brought out late last year—Tom received a redundancy; he was one of the last people to do so. We hope to see that mine open back up again, and it's within the hands of the state Labor government to do so, and I very much hope that they take the opportunity to do that as quickly as possible. But, luckily for Tom, the bright side of the story came through: his redundancy payment coincided with the last pub owner's retirement, and he was able to make his dream a reality—a great example of the New Acland Coal Mine working so well with the local community, supporting the local community and supporting local people to achieve their dreams. This is a fantastic example of what's happening throughout our region and a fantastic example of Goombungee getting ahead.

Locals and business owners on the Central Coast have been calling on this government to fix the road through Wyong for years. It's a bottleneck that can take over half an hour to clear on a busy day and even longer when there's an accident on the M1. It's a nightmare, and locals are fed up. One of my constituents, Victoria, from Ourimbah, told me she had had a bad accident on this round around five years ago. She said: 'I was told by the attending police officer that there were major upgrades to be taken in the near future, but nothing has ever come of it.' The upgrade of the Pacific Highway through Wyong should be a top priority for this government. It would ease congestion, improve safety and open up employment zones on either side of the town centre for businesses like Wideline, which has two factories, two to three kilometres apart, which can take 40 to 50 minutes to travel between.

So far the Morrison government has left the heavy lifting to New South Wales, which has managed to scrape together some funding for planning and property acquisition. While this is welcome, when will the roadworks begin? When will the federal government step up and invest in our local roads? According to the NRMA, the Central Coast has one of the biggest infrastructure backlogs in all of New South Wales. In fact, the last major project in our region was the M1 upgrade, started by the member for Grayndler when he was infrastructure minister. While other regions are surging ahead, the north end of the Central Coast is being left behind. After years of neglect, coasties have had enough. It's not good enough. We deserve better. (Time expired)

Last year I opened the Roe Highway and Kalamunda Road interchange in my electorate of Swan. In 2019 Ken Wyatt and I joined with Prime Minister Morrison to announce 80 per cent federal funding for this $86 million project. The Morrison government committed $68.8 million to this project. The great separation lowered Roe Highway beneath Kalamunda Road with two new roundabouts and on and off ramps. This gave congestion relief to 74,000 vehicles per day and saves them up to seven minutes travel during peak times. This is just another example of the Morrison government delivering on its commitments and supporting WA through congestion-busting and time-saving infrastructure.

This is in direct contrast to Labor who, last time they were in government, introduced the anti-WA mining tax and carbon tax. They are up to it again. Labor recently announced their Safeguard Mechanism policy which at the current carbon-credit unit rate of $60 per tonne means Labor plan to impose a $4.2 billion tax on WA companies and jobs. This is likely to be an underestimate, as extra demand will push prices higher. WA will account for nearly one-third of emissions captured by this mechanism, even though we are only seven per cent of the population. This is a stark example of Labor being anti-WA. If this is what they announce before the election, imagine what they will do if they win the election. Shame on Labor for being anti-WA!

We need to talk about toilets. Imagine being a woman on a powerline or construction worksite and expected to hold on all day or drive 20 minutes off-site because you've got to use the bathroom—and then putting up with the snide comments because you had to go in the first place. It's what Hawkesbury electrical apprentice Alison has experienced, because most of her worksites have limited, if any, toilet facilities. In fact, an ETU report found women in the trades are being expected to either hang on or face unsanitary, unsafe, inaccessible and unsuitable amenities. Women obviously have different bathroom needs at different times of their lives, and not having adequate facilities isn't just a health concern but a barrier to workforce participation. This is also a problem for ageing male tradies. If you've got prostate problems, it can be almost impossible to work on particular sites because of where the bathroom is, or isn't. Alison says she has been caught out many times, either having to hold on or to use toilets she describes as 'disgusting', with no paper, no sanitary bins and no running water or soap. We need national standards, and this has been ignored by the Morrison government, who are not capable of governing. Whether you work in an office or a building site, you have the right to be able to access toilet facilities that are fit for purpose. I fully support Alison and the ETU in demanding this most basic of rights. (Time expired)

Another gem in the crown of Redland road-building, the Quarry-Rickertt upgrade at Chelsea Road was complete last Friday, with lights switched on. Contrast that with state Labor, who have not duplicated a road in my electorate for over a decade. It's great also to see Queensland Labor hinting at removing these appalling vaccine mandates outside of the health and ageing sector, simply to help themselves through their integrity crisis.

Finally, the member for Warringah, who is over here, was quite happy to dump on me on 7.30 last year without obtaining any factual material or my version of events, without any presumption of innocence or due process. Of course, the star witness on the 7.30 episode apologised to me the moment she received a concerns notice, the ABC clinging to that episode and insisting on leaving it on air. It was all baseless rubbish from political opponents claiming to be mildly uncomfortable, and the national broadcaster was happy without any substantiation to broadcast it. It is a shame. To have this donation issue on the AEC referred to by the member for Warringah as 'pettiness'—I do seek your version of events, I've emailed you already for it, and I think you owe us an explanation. Will 7.30 be doing an episode on Ms Steggall? I won't be commenting.

The member for Newcastle has less than a minute.

Whether it's the crisis in aged care, housing, insecure jobs, wages going backwards or the cost of living skyrocketing, this government is on notice. The Australian people are watching you, watching you very closely, because actions speak much louder than words. No amount of photo ops and no number of media stunts are going to cover up for the fact that you've got nothing when you scratch beneath the surface. Words don't deliver a better future, Prime Minister, not even better words. The only way to secure a better future is through action and electing a Labor government. The time for talking is done. The Australian people have got you clocked. We need leaders who are bold, brave and determined enough to embrace decisive action. That's what the nation is looking for, and that is what an Albanese Labor government will deliver. (Time expired)

In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.

I inform the House that the Minister for Indigenous Australians will be absent from question time today and for the remainder of the week. The Minister for the Environment will answer questions on his behalf.

My question is to the Prime Minister. This parliament stands united in support of Ukrainian sovereignty and in opposition to Russia's attempt to intimidate the government and the people of Ukraine. Can the Prime Minister outline the steps he has taken to convey this parliament's support to his Ukrainian counterpart, and can the Prime Minister provide the House with an update on the current situation in Ukraine?

The Minister for Foreign Affairs has been in regular contact with our counterparts on these issues, and we continue to convey our strong support for the people of Ukraine. We also continue to convey our appreciation to our many partners and allies for the actions that they're taking, working closely with Australia, to send a very clear message to the Russian government that their threats of terrible violence against Ukraine are unacceptable and should be denounced. All efforts should be made to prevent Russia taking that step in committing violence against Ukraine.

Last night I convened the National Security Committee of Cabinet again to receive further updates on these matters, the work we are doing with our partners and the potential response that Australia would engage in, in the event of such violence being committed against Ukraine. We are continuing to work through those options with our partners. In the event that those terrible events take place, then we will move swiftly with our partners along the lines that we were considering and discussing last night not for the first time; we have considered them on many occasions in meeting as the National Security Committee to address those issues.

On 29 November in particular, in communicating directly with Australians who could be affected by this, we warned Australians of the build-up of Russian troops on Ukraine's border. On 18 December and 11 January we urged Australians to reconsider their need to travel to Ukraine due to security concerns. On 24 January we raised our travel advice to its highest level—'do not travel'. On 8 February we again urged Australians to leave immediately. On 13 February we relocated our embassy to Lviv. We will continue to keep the House updated on this very serious situation.

The other point we have been clearly making is that we expect all governments around the world to denounce what is taking place with the threats of violence against Ukraine. I note that the Chinese government has been banding together with the Russian government on this issue, and the Chinese government has not denounced what is occurring in Ukraine. I would urge the Chinese government, and all persons in this place to join with the government in urging the Chinese government, to denounce those actions and to allow an appropriate response through the United Nations rather than resisting that being done through the National Security Committee.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister please outline to the House the importance of the Morrison government's actions to strengthen the character test so that we can quickly deport noncitizens who commit violent or sexual offences? Is the Prime Minister aware of any alternative approaches?

I thank the member for Moncrieff for her question. In Australia today, there are foreign citizens who have been convicted of very serious crimes against Australians who have been jailed. As a result of the law as it stands today, despite our efforts as a government, we are unable to deport them. Since we came to government, we have deported some 10,000 people who have acted against the Australian people by committing crimes. As our first Minister for Immigration and Border Protection I began the process. One in particular was one Mr Alex Vella, the head of the Rebels motorcycle gang. I took the initiative to see that his visa was cancelled, while those who preceded me from the Labor Party sat silently and did nothing and allowed him to be here and lead that outlawed motorcycle gang here in Australia.

So, from the very outset, our government have been taking action on these issues. As immigration minister, I began the process of strengthening our laws to ensure—

The member for Macarthur is warned.

that we continue to take these actions. That was followed up by the now Minister for Defence when he was Minister for Home Affairs and of course the Minister for Home Affairs today.

There are still changes that need to be made to strengthen these provisions for people convicted of serious crimes. It's not a low-level crime to be involved in an armed robbery, serious violent crime, assaulting police or domestic violence. There is a loophole where if a judge hands down a lighter sentence of two years then they can get off having their visa cancelled and being deported. Those opposite—the Labor Party and Labor leader, together with the Greens—have been denying us this change for the last 1,200 days. The reason for that is the weakness of the leader of the Labor Party. He will not stand up on these issues. The leader of the Labor Party—

The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?

It's on standing order 90, and I refer to your previous rulings on character attacks.

I will ask the Prime Minister just to reflect on the words he's using. The Prime Minister has the call.

In whatever portfolio I have been in, particularly in immigration or as Prime Minister, the leader of the Labor Party has opposed the measures that I have sought to take forward to keep Australians secure, including this one now. He was opposed to offshore processing. He was opposed to temporary protection visas. He was opposed to boat turn-backs. He was opposed to mandatory detention.

The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?

It's on direct relevance. He's now going well beyond the remit of the question. Some of the things on his list are things that Labor introduced.

The Leader of the House?

The Prime Minister was asked in the question about alternative approaches. It's entirely appropriate for him to go to alternative approaches. Reference was made to standing order 90, which says:

… all imputations of improper motives to a Member and all personal reflections on other Members are considered to be highly disorderly.

There can be no suggestion whatsoever that the Prime Minister, in laying out the factual track record of the Leader of the Opposition, is being disorderly. It cannot be disorderly.

The most recent point of order raised by the Manager of Opposition Business is in relation to alternative approaches. If I can paraphrase, the concern is that 'alternative approaches' doesn't give a right to address any alternative approaches. The Prime Minister was, in my view, broadly on point in relation to the question. The request to comment as to whether there are any alternative approaches does give the Prime Minister the opportunity to address other approaches. The Prime Minister has the call.

All of the matters that I have referred to go to the integrity of our immigration system. If they are not prepared to do what is necessary, whether it's to stop the boats or to put in place the policies that are needed to deter the undermining of our immigration system, which they—including the leader of the Labor Party, with the Greens—know are stronger laws— (Time expired)

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to his previous answers in this House and to this report in today's Financial Review headlined 'Liberal MP backs inheritance taxes'. Now that the Treasurer's desperate scare campaign has blown up in his face, will he stop spending his day poring over speeches from more than 30 years ago, stop trawling his opponents' websites, abandon his unhinged scare campaigns and just do his job for once?

I thank the 12th man of politics, the shadow Treasurer! Thank you, Conrad.

The member for Moreton is warned.

The member for Mackellar has said he has never supported inheritance tax. But it's not something the Leader of the Opposition could ever say. It's not something the Leader of the Opposition could ever say, because this is what the Leader of the Opposition, the alternative Prime Minister of Australia, has said.

I am pleased to move this resolution, calling upon the government to consider the imposition of an inheritance tax.

The Treasurer will resume his seat. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition on a point of order.

The point of order is on the basis of relevance. The question didn't ask for alternative approaches.

I don't have a copy of the transcript of the question, but the Treasurer was asked about alternative taxes and whether they have worked or not and whether he would abandon a scare campaign. The question is very broad. I'll ask the Treasurer to remain as relevant to the question as possible, but it is a very broad question. The Treasurer has the call.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. We know that the Leader of the Opposition has never delivered a budget; he's never held a Treasury portfolio, but someone, to his great credit, has tabled his high school essay. But the reality is the Leader of the Opposition, the alternative Prime Minister himself, has supported death duties, supported an inheritance tax. Even as a shadow minister, the Leader of the Opposition has supported wealth taxes and has said that Australia should get its priorities back in balance. The Leader of the Opposition has—

The Treasurer will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business.

On disorderly conduct: I just want to clarify: is the reason you're saying this is in order that the question referred to his unhinged scare campaign and as long as he gives another unhinged scare campaign he's being relevant to the question?

That is not an appropriate point of order. The Manager of Opposition Business knows that's not an appropriate point of order. The Treasurer has the call.

The Leader of the Opposition wants the Australian people to forget his own words. He wants the Australian people to forget his own words. He wants to be a small target to sneak into government. Well, we've got news for him: when you are running to be the Prime Minister of Australia, the Australian people deserve to know what you have stood for. Despite protests that you no longer stand for those things, the fact is you have said those things. Oh no.

The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order.

Mr Speaker, it goes to disorderly conduct. It is not in order for a minister to stand at the dispatch box and give a three-minute attack based upon goodness knows what when the question was about today's front page.

Leader of the will resume his seat. I'll just say this: these things go both ways and, depending on how a question is phrased, that will or may elicit a certain response, so it's a double-edged sword. The Treasurer has the call.

This is the Leader of the Opposition who has never delivered a budget, who has never held a Treasury portfolio and who thinks his credentials to be the Prime Minister of Australia are a high school economics essay. The reality is that he has said on the public record that he supports death duties, and he went to the last election supporting a retirees tax, a housing tax, higher taxes on super, higher taxes on income and a family business tax. The Leader of the Opposition stands for higher taxes. We on this side of that House stand for lower taxes and have delivered exactly that to the Australian people. (Time expired)

The member for McEwen is warned.

My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Will the Deputy Prime Minister outline to the House how the Morrison-Joyce government is delivering critical infrastructure to regional and remote Australia? How is the government supporting growth and connectivity in the regions, such as in my electorate of Parkes? Is the Prime Minister aware of any alternative approaches?

I thank the honourable member for his question and know what a champion he is for the remote towns away from the large cities—regional cities such as Dubbo in his electorate. I know that in so many areas we have the forgotten roads but not the forgotten people—or not for the Nationals and the Liberals. We know how he stands up for people around Mungindi and Gravesend and how he took me just recently to roads around Moree.

It's the Nationals and the Liberals that have put money on the table for these forgotten roads, these roads of neglect that are so vitally important for people. And it's not just in the member for Parkes's electorate. The member for Cowper has made us aware in his electorate of the Taylors Arm Road and the Willawarrin to Macksville Road and the South Bank Road from Eungai Rail through to Tamban. And in Nicholls we know of the Tungamah Road, which is a forgotten road that can apply for money through this program, and the Bangerang Road. In Flynn, there is the Bauhinia Downs to Woorabinda Road and the Taroom to Bauhinia Downs Road. And in Barker there is the Dog Fence road off Browns Well Highway at Loxton, South Australia. It takes the Liberals and the Nationals in coalition to look into these corners, these disparate areas of our nation, and say that, if no-one else has worked on these roads for nearly 50 years, going right back to the Depression, and these roads need to be made safer so that we don't have accidents and people can get to the hospitals and get their kids to school, it is the dynamics of this side of the House that will look after these people and reach out to them so that they can be a part of our nation and be attached to services, like everybody else.

The member for Parkes also asked about any alternative policies. Of course, it was the member for Moreton who immediately, when this came out, suggested that this was not needed and was a waste of money. We have Greens senators who tell us that roads are things of the past. They're not going to utilise roads. Of course, that is what Australians are focused on. They're focused on the Greens-Labor coalition.

The Greens-Labor relationship was on last week. We had the leader of the Greens talking about the relationship that was on. But they had a bad Valentine's Day. They had a bit of a tiff and the relationship is off again. It's on; it's off. It's like Liz Taylor and Richard Burton: it has lots and lots of episodes, but we know where it ends up. And where it ends up is with a road to perdition—a road to perdition for Gladstone, a road to perdition for the Hunter Valley, a road to perdition for so many regional areas that see a Greens-Labor alliance as the mechanism that would bring about such a loss of standard of living, a loss of income prospects in the future and a lesser nation.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Last night at Senate estimates an official confirmed that, three years after it was announced, not a single cent of the $4.8 billion Emergency Response Fund has been spent on disaster recovery and, in that time, it has earned $836 million in interest. What sort of incompetent government sets aside $4.8 billion for disaster recovery and doesn't spend a cent?

The member would be aware that dedicated funds were provided for the bushfire recovery program and resilience packages. That is more than $2 billion that was directly allocated to ensure that we could support those communities affected by the Black Summer bushfires. The measure that the member is referring to is a long-term measure which enables funds to be drawn down to support the resilience of communities over the long term. And that is what is supporting the initiatives which have been put in place by the National Recovery and Resilience Agency, established by our government, which is led by the Honorable Shane Stone, who has done an outstanding job, including in the member's electorate, which I'm sure she would acknowledge, in sitting down with communities and understanding the challenges they face as they rebuild.

More than $2 billion has been allocated—not pulled out of some other fund—to ensure that the urgency of those issues could be addressed directly. The rebuilding and resilience programs continue to be funded and implemented across the country. It is important that that work continues. It is important that longer-term work continues to build up the resilience of so many communities across Australia, recommendations that came from the royal commission that I announced into these very issues so we could look after long-term resilience and address the short-term needs. So more than $2 billion is hitting the ground—including the round of grants which have been provided into the member's community over the Christmas and New Year period; they were announced by the minister only recently—in addition to the many funds and grants that were put in place.

The member for Eden-Monaro!

The member for Eden-Monaro is warned!

I particularly welcomed the contribution, as we worked through that period, of Andrew Constance. I particularly welcomed the contribution from Andrew Constance. He came to me—

Opposition members interjecting—

The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The level of interjection is too high. Member for Eden-Monaro, you asked the question. You, of all people, should be listening for the answer. The Prime Minister has the call.

I welcome the contribution of Andrew Constance who came to me and we worked together to ensure that the small business grants program that was provided to support those communities was upgraded and the timely delivery of those grants was done in accordance with the model that we worked up together. I can say to electors in Gilmore that Andrew Constance, as our Liberal candidate for Gilmore, will be a great advocate for you here in this place, as he proved to be in the seat of Bega in the state parliament, always taking these issues up directly—

The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order.

On relevance. It's about the impact on real people in the member for Eden-Monaro's electorate. It's not an opportunity for political spruiking. It's about real people, some of whom are still—

The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. I don't know how many times I have to say this, but if you want me to rule on points of order—the level of interjection is ridiculously high. The Prime Minister has the call for just six seconds. I can't rule on the point of order of relevance, because I simply can't hear the Prime Minister enough over the wall of interjections. All members of the House are on a general warning, and the pointing and gesticulating from the member for McEwen is not helpful. At least it's quiet, but that's about the only thing that can be said for it. The Prime Minister has the call.

Andrew Constance, as the Liberal candidate for Gilmore, will stand up for the people of Gilmore and get the results that he's proved to be able to get— (Time expired)

My question is to the Treasurer Just this morning I received an email from a local business in Manly on the verge of closing their doors after 63 years of trading. Revenue's down, they're struggling for staff and there is no tourism. I commend Treasurer Kean and the—

Government members interj ecting—

The member for Warringah will resume her seat for a moment. Now the level of interjections on my right is precluding me from hearing the question. The member for Warringah has the right to ask her question in silence—if for no other reason, so that I can hear it and so the person who the question is directed at, who I still couldn't hear, can also hear the question. The member for Warringah has the call.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I recommence from the top?

Yes, please.

Thank you. Just this morning, Treasurer, I received an email from a local business in Manly on the verge of closing their doors after 63 years of trading. Revenue's down, they're struggling for staff and there is no tourism. I commend Treasurer Kean and the New South Wales government for their support package for our businesses. The federal government are riding on the coat-tails of New South Wales's economy when it suits them but are now not standing with the New South Wales Treasurer to match their support package. Will you commit to support struggling businesses in Warringah in New South Wales?

I thank the member for her question and hope that letter she received had a $100,000 cheque and that it was properly disclosed, because these Independents are speaking from both sides of their mouths The last thing they are is true Independents.

The reality is that this side of the House have helped deliver more than $60 billion of economic support to the people of New South Wales—record support to the people of New South Wales, whether it's been the JobKeeper payment, the cash flow boost, the $750 payments to pensioners, carers, veterans and others on income support, or, indeed, the COVID disaster payment, where we picked up the tab during the recent Delta outbreak. We partnered with the New South Wales government on a fifty-fifty basis to provide business support, which was very important.

But now the economy is recovering strongly. There are definitely businesses and families who continue to be challenged by the current economic conditions, but Australia has outperformed all major advanced economies. We have been there for the Australian people, including the people of New South Wales, when they needed our help. Today, we have an unemployment rate at 4.2 per cent, a 13-year low, on track to a 50-year low. We look at the strong pipeline of business investment, which is counterintuitive during a recession. Businesses are taking advantage of the immediate expensing provisions that we have outlined in successive budgets. We have held on to our AAA credit rating from the three leading credit-rating agencies, and we've been supporting households and businesses with lower taxes, because that's consistent with the values that we on this side of the House support and live by.

Another proof point to the people of New South Wales that we are recovering strongly is consumer confidence. Today consumer confidence was up by 3.3 per cent for the past week, the single biggest increase in consumer confidence since April 2021. It was up in New South Wales, it was up in Western Australia, it was up in Victoria, it was up in Queensland, it was up in South Australia and it was up in Tasmania. So the fact is on the health front we have seen the omicron cases and the ICU and the hospitalisation numbers start to come down, but our economic support is still there with the COVID payment for those who are forced to take up to a week of leave from their job. (Time expired)

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer remind the House how the Morrison government's tax cuts have helped to strengthen our economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, and is the Treasurer aware of any alternative approaches?

I thank the member for Chisholm for her question, acknowledge her experience in small business and acknowledge the fact that in her electorate over 60,000 constituents—

The member for Chifley!

will get tax relief as a result of policies that we have supported on this side of the House and more than 20,000 businesses in the electorate of Chisholm will be able to access the immediate expensing provisions.

The member for Rankin will leave under 94(a).

The member for Rankin then left the chamber.

Much to the embarrassment of his Labor colleagues, the shadow Treasurer said the biggest test, the most important test and the key test of the Morrison government's management of the pandemic will be what happens to unemployment and jobs. That's what the shadow Treasurer said—the single biggest test of our government's management of the pandemic is what happens to unemployment and jobs. The reason why it's of great embarrassment to the shadow Treasurer is because today the unemployment rate is 4.2 per cent—a 13-year low. When Labor last left office, the unemployment rate was 5.7 per cent, and we now have full employment in sight. And there are 1.7 million more Australians in work today than under the Labor Party, including one million more women in work today than under the Labor Party. That's our record. And cutting taxes for families, cutting taxes for small business and putting in place an immediate expensing provision to drive more investment is all part of that economic recovery plan. But we have been opposed every step of the way by a Greens-Labor coalition, and beware those who protest too much.

The other day was the Leader of the Opposition ruling out partnerships with the Greens even though he was part of a government that was in partnership with the Greens. Today, it's the Leader of the Greens who's ruling out a partnership with the Labor Party even though he was celebrating the fact that he is calling his own members shadow ministers. This Leader of the Opposition, this Leader of the Labor Party, who's never held a Treasury portfolio, who's never delivered a budget, but who has tabled his year 7 economics assignments—

The Treasurer will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?

A point of order on direct relevance: I just don't see how this is possibly in any way directly relevant to the question that was asked.

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Treasurer was asked about alternative approaches in relation to economic recovery. The Treasurer is being relevant.

Opposition members interjecting—

No, no. Look, the Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Treasurer has the call.

The reason why this is a relevant alternative approach is because the Labor Party and the Greens have an alignment of policies—an alignment of policies on a family business tax, an alignment of policies on a housing tax and an alignment of policies when it comes to higher taxes on super and income and on higher taxes on the mining companies and, indeed, on electricity prices, and of course an alignment of policies when it comes to this Leader of the Opposition and that Leader of the Greens with respect to death duties and an inheritance tax.

The Treasurer will resume his seat.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Over the weekend the New South Wales Premier said South Coast communities were still struggling with bushfire recovery and admitted his government could have done better. Will the Prime Minister also admit he failed my community by failing to deliver the support he promised?

It was the most testing of times for the communities of the South Coast and many other communities around the country, whether it was up on the Mid North Coast of New South Wales and further north, where I also went with the New South Wales Premier at the time. It was also a time of considerable stress for those up in Queensland when, in September 2019, Jenny and I visited those communities and sat and listened to them and heard about the things that were needed. That's why, in early 2020, we put in place the actions which were coordinated through a coordinator-general involving some $2 billion worth of support to aid the immediate assistance and recovery from those bushfires.

For the first time, we also had a mandatory callout of the defence forces to support Operation Bushfire Assist, something we had pre-prepared for in about October, I think, from memory, with the then Minister for Defence. A trial run was conducted, and that meant we could move to support our state governments. I thank the state governments who accepted that assistance. The Victorian government, in particular, was very appreciative of that assistance. We saw HMAS Adelaide off Mallacoota bringing so many people to safety. This was a great national crisis, particularly in the early stages of 2020, and the government responded with clear funding commitments and clear commitments to get that onto the ground, but also with an open mind.

That's where I share the views of the now NSW Premier, and that's why I thank the former state member for Bega and the Liberal candidate for Gilmore, Andrew Constance. People will recall that at that time the then member for Bega and state minister was very upset with the government, and he said some very direct things to me. I'm glad he did because he was instrumental in assisting the government with tailoring our assistance and making sure that the old rules, which weren't working fast enough for those communities, were changed. It was my view at the time that we needed to change it, and it was the Liberal member for Bega, Andrew Constance, who brought that to the government and worked closely with the government, despite his strong views. And I thank the Liberal candidate for Gilmore now for that.

The Prime Minster will resume his seat. Manager of Opposition Business, the Prime Minister has concluded his answer.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister outline to the House why it's important to take a consistent position on law enforcement and national security to keep Australians safe? Is the PM aware of any alternative approaches?

I thank the member for Herbert for his consistency, having served in uniform like many in this chamber. I thank them all for their service. Those who put themselves at the greatest risk need to have the confidence that the government that can send them into harm's way is consistent when it comes to the issues of law and order and national security.

Our government has always been consistent when it comes to these matters, whether it be on our borders, our investment in our defence forces and building up our defence capability, working with our partners and alliances, restoring the Quad or moving into the AUKUS arrangement, which is the single largest national security policy we have seen since ANZUS. It is important that you're consistent on these things and that you stand for what you believe in on these issues. I have always done so as a minister, as a backbencher, as a shadow minister, as a treasurer, as a social services minister and, indeed, as a prime minister.

But the Leader of the Labor Party, together with the Greens, cannot make that same claim. It was the Leader of the Labor Party who, together with the Labor Party, voted against the strengthening the character test bill, which allows serious criminals to avoid having their visas cancelled, and they have remained in this country. It was the Leader of the Labor Party who opposed our bill to crack down on child sex offenders, and this included a 25 per cent mandatory minimum for serious and recidivist offenders. He voted against it. On border protection they voted 77 times against measures to strengthen our borders. They voted 22 times—

The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order?

On relevance: the question didn't call for an absolute general spray, which is what we're getting now.

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Prime Minister is referring to alternative approaches in relation to law enforcement and national security. The Prime Minister is in order and has the call.

The Leader of the Labor Party supported cuts to the AFP, to the Australian Crime Commission and to AUSTRAC. They cut 700 staff out of customs and border protection. He called the Pacific Solution 'indecent and inhumane'. On 1 July 2012 he called Nauru 'essentially a bus stop on the way to Australia'. Who would trust him with protecting our borders, together with the Greens? He went to the national conference of the Labor Party and said, 'If people were in a boat, including families and children, I myself couldn't turn them around.' That's what he said about turnbacks. On what he said about mandatory detention at the national conference of the Labor Party: he personally moved a motion in the Left caucus endorsing a policy that would abolish mandatory detention, abolish temporary protection visas and restore Christmas Island to Australia's migration zone. We know what the Leader of the Labor Party's form is when it comes to national security and protecting our borders, and there are four letters that—

The Prime Minister's time has expired.

I'll have to wait for next time!

My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. I refer to his last two answers in response to members whose electorates were ravaged by bushfires, where people are still living in caravans. Isn't his response exactly what former Premier Gladys Berejiklian was referring to when she stated, 'Lives are at stake today, and he is just obsessed with petty political pointscoring', in the same text message where she went on to say, 'He is actively spreading'—a word that is unparliamentary?

The Leader of the House, on a point of order?

It's against standing orders for the Leader of the Opposition to unnecessarily name someone to start with, in relation to that quote. It is not necessary. More importantly than that—

Opposition members interjecting—

Just pause for a moment there. Members on my left, I need to hear the point of order.

More importantly, the former Premier of New South Wales has stated, in response to that rumour and the article to which the Leader of the Opposition refers, that they are not her words. She has clarified that. And this guy misleading with his glass jaw isn't going to change it!

The Leader of the House will resume his seat. I don't need to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. I'm not in a position to be an arbiter as to who has said what. The question is in order. The Prime Minister has the call.

The Australian government, through the National Recovery and Resilience Agency, which we established following the royal commission I called into those disasters, is administering the COVID-19 disaster payments and the recovery following the recent storms and floods, is supporting communities impacted by large-scale events which include the bushfires and the North Queensland floods, and is undertaking new initiatives to reduce risks and manage the impact of future natural hazard zones. More than $2.8 billion has been allocated to the recovery, including the now $2.2 billion National Bushfire Recovery Fund as well as assistance already available through the existing disaster support funding mechanisms. More than $1.7 billion from the fund has already been delivered for locally led efforts on the ground, along with over $700 million in other assistance. In addition, the $390 million for the Black Summer Bushfire Recovery Grants Program, which will assist communities directly impacted by those bushfires, continues and remains a priority.

In February this year the Minister for Emergency Management and National Recovery and Resilience announced that the government would provide an additional $110 million on top of the $280 million already committed to provide further support to those communities. I remember vividly at the time, when I announced the $2 billion in early January in the Prime Minister's courtyard, saying, 'This is what we will do, and if we need to more we will do more.' And we are doing more. We're continuing to deliver this support on the ground. We're continuing to work with the state government, which is obviously seeking to address the accommodation issues, and we continue to support the communities when it comes to their resilience and recovery on the ground all over the country. The Leader of the Labor Party has been seeking to exploit natural disasters for political gain for the last three years. It's a grubby tactic on his behalf, it reflects on his character and he has failed the character test.

The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.

My point of order goes to the nature of rulings as to whether or not you will intervene in advance of a point of order being taken when answers are clearly going beyond the standing orders. At the moment, at the end of answers, we're getting this diatribe. From the moment we then stand up to raise, when an intervention hasn't already occurred, the minister says, 'Oh no, now I've finished.' This is happening consistently now.

I thank the Manager of Opposition Business for the point of order. I can't determine when a question is going to be finished; that's a matter for the person answering the question. But what I will say is this: I think that line of questioning, particularly in the way it was asked, the wording, is bordering on argument and inferences, even if it is quoting the then Premier of New South Wales. I think the Manager of Opposition Business knows exactly what I'm talking about. I let the question through, but it was bordering on being out of order in any event. The member for Robertson has the call.

Thanks, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison Government is reforming migration law to prevent violence against women and children, and is the minister aware of any alternative approaches or views?

I thank the member Robertson for her passion and concern for the protection of women and children against family violence and recommend her work to the House. It is true that the reason the government has pursued a change to the character test through legislation over the last 1,200 days is, in principle, primarily to protect the Australian community from harm. In particular, it is to protect women and children from family and domestic violence in the remit that is given to the federal government—that is, the protection of our borders, the issuing of visas and the movement of people in and out of Australia. We have a particular responsibility—and it is a point that advocates for domestic violence victims make over and over again—to make better laws, to work with the judiciary, to change the system, to make sure that, wherever we have power and responsibility, we deal with the reasons family and domestic violence happens against women and children primarily.

It is not enough to talk about these things; you have to do them. That is why we have had a bill in front of this House for 1,200 days. For 1,200 days the government has said: give us more power not just to deal with the horrible crimes against women and children when they happen but to prevent them from occurring in the first place by denying visas offshore. In response, yesterday we heard a little bit about how Labor haven't been doing their homework. And the response from Senator Keneally today again highlights that they have no substantial opposition to this bill. She said today that if she were immigration minister—Senator Keneally is Labor's spokesperson on national security and the protection of women from overseas criminals—she would use section 116 of the Migration Act to deport permanent visa holders. She said that I, as minister, should have been aware of that and should have read that section of the act. There is only one problem with what Senator Keneally said publicly just before question time today: if she kept reading the act, she'd have got to section 117 of the act. Section 117 says that that power can't be used in the case of a permanent visa holder. It cannot be cancelled under section 116. That's millions of visa holders. So I say to Senator Keneally: you've had 1,200 days to do your homework on this bill. Understand that we are serious about the protection of Australians from serious crime and serious criminals. Read the act properly and you will understand this is a good law. The Labor Party should be supporting it. It is inexplicable that the Leader of the Opposition has signed a deal with the member for Melbourne in relation to this bill to oppose these laws when you consider what they'll do to protect Australians from future harm and future crimes.

The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?

It's on direct relevance. How on earth can this claim, which is untrue, about some signed deal be directly relevant when it's not true? You have a minister making it up. You have a minister—

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business knows full well that that my role is not to say what is correct and what is not. I am going to give the call to the minister. There are six seconds to go. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order?

The minister just made an accusation, and the context of the accusation is about violence against women and children—

No. The Leader of the Opposition—

That's the context.

If there's been an unparliamentary remark, you are entitled to—

It is not on parliamentary language, Mr Speaker. He has made a clear allegation that a signed deal has been done relating to violence against women and children—

The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. Let me just say this: if an unparliamentary remark has been used then a member is entitled to rise in his or her place and raise it. But to raise that something is factually incorrect is not an appropriate point of order during question time. Members know when there is an appropriate time for that to take place.

No, you don't have the call. I haven't given the Leader of the Opposition the call. The minister has the call.

The truth is that Labor and the Greens voted against this bill. I don't believe, and Australians don't believe, the member for Melbourne is just someone that he used to know. (Time expired)

My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. The Prime Minister expanded the Safer Communities Fund after the Christchurch terrorist attack to address risks associated with racial intolerance. The same fund, the Auditor-General has now confirmed, was used to favour coalition seats. The Holland Park Mosque applied for a grant after being subject to a number of Islamophobic attacks, including vandalism that referenced the Christchurch shooter as a 'saint' and someone wielding a machete. Why did they miss out?

I thank the member for her question. I am absolutely delighted to take a question on such important matters as our national security. The member has raised issues in relation to the Safer Communities Fund and the way that that grant funding is allocated. I can say that there have been a number of applications that have been made from communities right around Australia. In fact, since 2016, there has been more than $265 million invested into well over 600 projects to make sure that our communities remain safe.

As a government, we have always acted in the best interests of our communities. Clearly, in relation to grant funding—and I make this point very sincerely, and those opposite, I understand, have not been in government for quite some time and so maybe are not up to speed with what grant funding guidelines actually mean—it is very clear that grant funding guidelines in relation to the Safer Communities Fund were complied with.

Order! The minister will resume her seat for one moment. Don't go too far. The member for Lyons will go to the microphone and withdraw that comment—that unparliamentary remark.

I withdraw.

And he will now withdraw from the chamber under 94(a).

The member for Lyons then left the chamber.

What I was saying at the time was that the grant funding programs are properly administered, and in fact the ANAO have on numerous occasions indicated that relevant grant funding programs have been properly administered.

In relation to particular grants that were awarded under the Safer Communities Fund, I think it's important to note that a lot of the funding that went towards these programs came from proceeds of crime, so it was money that was actually taken from criminals and rediverted into the community. There were a range of programs that were assessed by the department and, yes, there was some intervention from ministers and some of—

Opposition members interjecting—

Order! Members on my left, you might want to listen to the answer.

There was some intervention from ministers responsible to support key programs in a number of seats. So those opposite can get all precious and work themselves up about how grant funding was in fact allocated, but there were instances where ministers did take specific responsibility to make sure that programs could be supported in various communities.

The member for Chifley?

We have been going for three minutes where a specific question was asked about a mosque that had a swastika daubed on it, and this minister cannot answer the question at all and has gone around in generalities.

The member for Chifley will resume his seat. I accept that there was a degree of specificity about—

Member for Blaxland, that is entirely inappropriate. The question goes to the Safer Communities Fund. It did expressly go to a specific church—or mosque. If the minister is able to comment on a specific application, the minister should say so. If the minister can't, the minister should say so. But the minister has been asked about the Safer Communities Fund. She is relevant.

The member for McEwen will leave under 94(a).

The member for McEwen then left the chamber.

I take on board the concerns that people have in relation to swastikas on buildings, and there is strong evidence that the coalition government has always been strong in relation to taking— (Time expired)

My question is also to the Minister for Home Affairs. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison government's strong border security and ongoing focus on law enforcement are tackling the threat of illicit drugs to Australian families and communities? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?

Point of order.

The Manager of Opposition Business?

In terms of the expected order of this House, we've got a minister who's now going to be prepared to answer about alternatives but who has no idea and who refuses to answer about a mosque that got a swastika painted on it. Are they doing their job at all? They compare the alternative—

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.

Government members interjecting—

I really don't need advice from members on my right. The minister has the call.

I thank the member for his question, and I thank him for his very strong interest in national security and law enforcement matters over a particularly long period of time. The coalition government absolutely understand that keeping our community safe is about much more than successfully navigating a pandemic. There are many other health concerns, and there are many other threats to safety. For example, if we look at shipments of drugs, any shipments that we can actually stop coming into this country means that lives are saved and fewer families are subject to the horrendous impacts of drug use.

The important point here is that we are making significant progress. In the second half of last year alone there were more than 9,300 kilograms of illicit drugs that were stopped from reaching Australian streets. This includes over 2½ thousand kilograms of methamphetamine and 620kg of heroin. It's very sad that one death in the Australian community takes place for approximately every two kilograms of heroin that hits our street. On just heroin alone, around 310 lives have been saved in about six months just by seizing it and keeping it away from our communities. That's why the coalition has never been and will never be soft on illicit drugs or the criminals that traffic them. Whether it's detecting drugs in the border, whether it's stopping them from entering into our country, whether it's refusing or cancelling the visas of organised crime figures, this government, the Morrison government, is always going to back our law enforcement agencies, and we are going to maintain the integrity of our borders.

I was asked about alternatives. What we've seen from those opposite is that they have previously voted against the strengthening the character test bill. That is designed—

The member for Macarthur will leave under 94(a).

The member for Macarthur then left the chamber.

That is designed to make our community even safer from these criminals, including those who actually traffic in drugs. I would have thought that Labor would have been lining up to support this bill, but, in fact, that's not the case. On many issues they can be quite noisy; they can be quite rowdy, but in terms of national security and law enforcement matters what we generally hear from those opposite is, in fact, silence. It's crickets from those opposite.

The track record of the government is actually very clear, and the Prime Minister referred to it earlier today—that since we have been in government we have cancelled 10,000 visas. That contrasts to the 1,000 that were cancelled by those opposite. (Time expired)

My question is to the Prime Minister. Childcare fees have gone up nearly 40 per cent since this government came to office, but real wages have gone backwards, falling $700 in the last year alone. Hasn't it become harder for working families to make ends meet under this almost decade-old government?

I thank the member for her question. When it comes to childcare services and childcare fees, as the government announced in MYEFO in response to pressures in terms of cost of living, from 7 March this year, so in just two or three weeks, the average Australian family with a second or third child in child care will be $2,200 better off.

Balancing child care and the childcare needs of our society is important. Forty-seven per cent of Australian families have children in child care right now. Fifty-three per cent of families don't. Right now, the rebate in terms of child care subsidy is up to 85 per cent, with the average family receiving a rebate of around 60 per cent. Over 240,000 children and their families are benefiting. The government understands the challenges with the second and the third child, which is why these extra rebates—over $1 billion is coming through, approaching $2 billion—will start earlier than we first hoped. By bringing it well forward, we are understanding the needs that children have. That's $2,200 extra in the family's pocket for the second and third child for over 200,000 children.

If we think it through, average out-of-pocket costs for centre based day care are $4 an hour, compared to $4.87 an hour in June 2018. That is less than $5 per hour per child for the families of 70 per cent of children in centre based day care and less than $2 per hour per child for the families of 24 per cent of children in centre based day care, and around 90 per cent of families using child care are entitled to a childcare subsidy of between 50 and 85 per cent. That is the endowment that the Morrison government has done with a strong economy. That's the endowment that the Morrison government has done in terms of lowering taxes and ensuring our economy is moving forward from the national perspective. That's the endowment that the Morrison government is delivering, and the changes of 7 March for the second and third child, saving an average $2,200, is further evidence of what that endowment is.

Child care is important. It's important for families. It's important for productivity. It's important for the one million women who've entered the workforce since we came to government, and the Morrison government will continue to stand up for families. (Time expired)

My question is to the Minister for the Environment, representing the Minister for Women. Will the minister inform the House on how the Morrison government's reforms are helping to prevent violence against women and children?

I thank the member for Lindsay for her question and commend her once again on her leadership on women and young people's issues in her electorate of Lindsay. Women and children have the right to feel safe and supported in their homes, in their businesses, in their communities and online. Sadly, the level of gendered violence within Australia is a national shame, and it's something we are absolutely committed to addressing. The goal and target of the next national plan to end violence women and children is clear. It is to end all forms of gendered violence. No level of violence is acceptable. The target is and must be zero.

At the Commonwealth level, annual funding for women's safety has increased significantly. In the last budget, the Morrison government announced a record investment of $1.1 billion over four years in new funding, and that is just a down payment on the next national plan. Of course, it's not just about funding, important though that is, but about meaningful reform. And it's not just about the women's portfolio but about a whole-of-government approach.

We're committed to improving our own workplace here in Parliament House through the Set the standard report and workplace reform bills before the House. This year our landmark Online Safety Act has come into effect and has introduced a world-first cyberabuse take-down scheme, because we are determined to unmask the trolls. We've increased maximum penalties, including up to life imprisonment, and have introduced mandatory minimum sentences for the most serious child sex offences. We've invested in establishing the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation and have invested over $300 million to support a national strategy to prevent and respond to child sexual abuse.

Importantly, because we will not take our foot off the pedal with this, on Wednesday we will seek to pass legislation, the Migration Amendment (Strengthening the Character Test) Bill, to strengthen the government's powers to quickly deport noncitizens who commit violent or sexual offences, because right now, if a foreign criminal has been convicted of a serious criminal offence punishable by at least two years in prison but has received a sentence of less than that, we are powerless to deport them. These are very serious offences. They include stalking, domestic violence, breaching AVOs, concealing child abuse offences, date rape offences. They are not trivial offences. They are serious crimes by foreign criminals who should be kicked out of this country. I'll look forward to Labor supporting this bill, because the Morrison government will not take a step backwards when it comes to keeping women safe and keeping children safe.

My question is to the Prime Minister. More than 700 people have died of COVID in aged care just this year alone and tens of thousands are not receiving the care they deserve. The Prime Minister cut $1.7 billion from aged care, and he's refused to sack his totally incompetent minister. Why won't the Prime Minister just do his job and fix aged care?

I want to thank the member for her question. In particular, in terms of support for aged care the government has made sure that we have taken a series of steps, firstly, through the pandemic, and, secondly, in terms of systemic reform in response to the royal commission, which the Prime Minister called in response to the tragedy and the travesty which was the Oakden nursing home under the state-run previous public health system in South Australia, under the previous government there as well.

In terms of the actions that have been taken during the course of the pandemic, we have, at this stage, delivered 83.4 per cent of booster coverage to the eligible population, 100 per cent of facilities have had visits and over 300 have had a second visit for boosters—to go back and to encourage. In terms of workforce—

The member for Hotham!

over 82,000 surge positions have been made available. This year, we've had over 50 million units of PPE, which have been provided to our aged-care homes. In addition, that includes 13.9 million rapid antigen tests, which have been in place continuously—continuously—since August of last year and moving forwards. Beyond that, we've also been able to provide now nine million rapid antigen tests to over two million concessional cardholders since this program was begun in January. So all of these elements have come together.

More broadly though, they come against the basis of the largest additional investment in aged care in Australian history—$17.7 billion at last year's budget in response to the royal commission. It's not just the largest investment in aged care in Australian history but the largest response to any royal commission at any time in Australian history, a commission which this Prime Minister called when no others previously had ever done such a thing. And, in particular, amongst that—

The Member for Franklin!

That includes over $7 billion for home care to provide greater options for people who are staying at home and over $8 billion all up for residential aged care, and that goes both to the quality of care and to the sustainability of that care. In particular, that includes the additional funds for nursing care minutes—200 minutes. That includes the additional funds for ensuring that we are able to have visits from general practitioners. That includes the funds to ensure that there is greater support for the training of the staff to encourage and to thank them. And there is also the $600 million now through four retention bonus payments to support those staff and to encourage them back in. All of these things are coming together, and, although it's been difficult, what we do see is one of the lowest rates of loss of life in the world in aged care, and we thank our staff and honour them for that. (Time expired)

My question is to the Minister for Defence. Would the minister please update the House on the Morrison government's strong and effective measures to protect Australians from harm? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?

I want to thank the member for Boothby for her fine service to this parliament and for her deep commitment to veterans and to the defence community not just in her seat but in South Australia. I thank her for the decency she has demonstrated in her dealings with those individuals and many more.

It is the case that our nation and, indeed, the world faces one of the most complex and potentially catastrophic international security environments since the Second World War. We may be on the cusp of Russia going into the Ukraine and the tragedy that would follow that. The consequences, we know, would be catastrophic for the region, for Europe and, indeed, for the world. We're seeing the Chinese government amass thousands of missiles in our own region, now with 20 points of military presence in the South China Sea, and this government will do everything within its power to keep our country safe, to avoid any conflict in our region and to stare down those people that would seek to initiate conflict in our region. But you need to argue from a position of strength, and you need to have strong character to be able to do it. The problem is that, when I am asked about alternative approaches, it really makes you focus—

The minister will resume his seat. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order.

Point of order, Mr Speaker. The minister is right in describing us as facing one of the most difficult strategic circumstances we've had—

What's the point of order?

but he can't keep on that for more than 80 seconds before going to alternative approaches.

The Minister for Defence is making a bit of a habit of this; he is returning to the dispatch box before being called. The Minister for Defence will resume his seat. I was just about to say that, if the Deputy Leader of the Opposition wants to make a point of order, he's entitled to do that, but he needs to state the point of order first up. Deputy Leader of the Opposition, just return to the dispatch box. Is your point of order relevance?

Indeed, it is.

Thank you. What I will say is this: the Minister for Defence was asked a question about what the government is doing in relation to strong and effective measures. He was then also asked about alternative approaches. The minister, before he launches into an 'alternative approaches' response, does need to state what the government's policies are that would, in effect, give the government strong and effective measures, so I would ask the minister to deal with that beforehand. I know the minister has been spoken to about this by Speaker Smith. Otherwise you're comparing an alternative approach to what? The Minister for Defence has the call.

If I'm asked to compare the pair, I will compare the pair, Mr Speaker. If you ask about this government's policy to keep our country safe and secure, this Prime Minister and this government entered into the AUKUS agreement with our most important allies to keep our country safe. That Leader of the Opposition, when he was Kevin Rudd's Deputy Prime Minister, did nothing at all except rip money out of defence. If I'm asked to compare the pair, this Prime Minister has presided over a massive build-up of investment in our Defence Force personnel and in the equipment we're buying them. What did this Leader of the Opposition do? He demonstrated weakness as part of a government that was incompetent and hopeless when it came to national security.

I'm asked about national security. The approach of this Prime Minister of this government was to keep our borders secure.

The member for Solomon will leave under 94(a).

The member for Solomon then left the chamber.

This Prime Minister and I stopped the boats, and we kept them stopped. This Leader of the Opposition, when he was last in a position of power, presided over policies which saw people, including women and children, drowning at sea. He lost control of our borders, and it cost $16 billion. It was an international disgrace. None of those mistakes have been made by this Prime Minister. If you want to compare the pair, if you want to look at ways in which we are keeping our country secure, if you want a comparison of character, which is important, you don't hang out in a museum talking to Bob Carr and Paul Keating and some other murky figure You stand up for our country, which is what this leader is doing. (Time expired)

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet confirmed at Senate estimates that no-one has investigated the leaking of text messages between the Prime Minister and the French president. Can the Prime Minister explain how this personal text message on his phone was leaked? How can the Prime Minister expect cabinet discussions to remain confidential when his communications with foreign leaders leak?

I am asked about my communications with other leaders, particularly the French President, and that was in relation to the government's decision to enter into an agreement with the United States and the United Kingdom to give Australia the opportunity to develop nuclear propelled submarines. I can confirm that, when I spoke to the French President back in June, I was very clear with the French President that the conventionally powered diesel submarines that we had entered into an agreement to build with the French government, through the Naval Group, would not meet our strategic requirements given the situation in our region. I was very clear about those capabilities.

The member for Gorton on a point of order?

Yes, Mr Speaker, on relevance. The question I asked was whether in fact the Prime Minister could confirm how his text message was leaked and how we can in any way trust this Prime Minister about cabinet leaks if he cannot in any way determine how his text message was leaked in relation to—

The member for Gorton will resume his seat. It's not an opportunity to ask the question again, Member for Gorton. The question goes to the dealings between the Prime Minister and the President of France and the leaking of text messages. The Prime Minister is relevant and has the call.

So when ultimately we were able to form the agreement between Australia, the UK and the United States known as AUKUS, the most significant advance in our partnership arrangements with both of these countries to protect Australia's national security—as we were able to achieve with ANZUS many, many years ago—we were in a position to go forward with our plans to develop nuclear propelled submarines. At that point, we had to advise the French government that we would not be continuing. If those opposite think there is a friendly way or an easy way to tell another country that a $90 billion contract can't be continued, I'm all ears. But to have engaged in the process that those opposite pretend we could have would have put at risk the AUKUS agreement and Australia's national security. This is what you have to do as a Prime Minister. If I have to decide between Australia's national security interests and avoiding potentially offending someone, I choose Australia. We know what the Leader of the Opposition would do.

Opposition members interjecting—

I don't know what members on my left are going to do when we get rid of these masks, because I'll be able to see you screaming out much more easily than I can right now, but that shouldn't be an incentive to continue.

My question is to the Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts, representing the Attorney-General. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison government's commitment to protecting the rule of law will ensure Australians are protected from harm?

I thank the member for Forde, who has a very strong commitment to protecting the rule of law, as do all on this side of the House. That can be seen through the legislation that we've been taking forward in this term in government—for example, the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2021, which establishes an extended supervision order scheme to ensure that terrorist offenders who are released into the community at the end of their custodial sentence are subject to tailored, close supervision; the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Sunsetting Review and Other Measures) Bill 2021, which provides for the continuation of key counterterrorism powers, including control orders and preventative detention orders; and the Crimes Amendment (Remissions of Sentences) Bill 2021, which addresses the significant risks to community safety as a result of remissions being granted to federal offenders under state and territory law. These are all ways in which we have demonstrated our commitment to protecting the rule of law, as well as the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor Amendment Bill 2021, to assist in monitoring the performance of that person's role.

We're also very committed to the rule of law online. The rule of law needs to apply in the digital town square as much as it does in the physical town square. That is a principle that the Morrison government has been taking tangible action to give effect to. We passed the Online Safety Act last year. It's now in operation, giving our eSafety Commissioner stronger powers to crack down on cyberbullying, toxic online abuse, harmful content and the non-consensual sharing of intimate images. All of these things are devastating to their victims. Sadly, overwhelmingly the victims, particularly of the non-consensual of sharing of intimate images, are women and girls. And we have taken concrete action to deal with this and other scourges.

We've also introduced the antitrolling bill to crackdown on anonymous trolls making defamatory comments online. We've released the exposure draft of the privacy legislation amendment bill, aimed at protecting Australians online and keeping Australia's privacy laws fit for purpose in the digital age. We are not stopping there, because we know the online world is changing so quickly, which is why the House Select Committee on Social Media and Online Safety is conducting an inquiry. We will watch the evidence and the recommendations of that committee very carefully.

Keeping Australians safe is a priority for this government. We're acting on that priority, whether it comes to our national security laws or whether it comes to keeping Australians safe online. This is a central focus of the Morrison government.

My question is to the Prime Minister. The price of beef has increased by 65 per cent since this government came to office, but real wages have gone backwards, falling $700 in the last year alone. Hasn't it become harder for working families to make ends meet under this almost decade-old government?

I thank the member for her question on cost of living, because there are considerable pressures on cost of living: the inflationary environment that we're facing and the economic uncertainty that is a function of many things, but including what we're seeing in Ukraine. In particular, in Ukraine—

Honourable members interjecting—

Those opposite seem to be puzzled by this. They seem to not understand that troops amassing on Ukraine's border—and the impact that has on gas prices and petroleum—has consequence for this country. That's what happens when you have an opposition and a Labor Party that doesn't understand the serious issues of national security. I was taking the interjection, Mr Speaker.

The Prime Minister will return to the question.

But I'll return to the question. On the cost of living, the inflationary pressures that Australia faces mean financial management of the budget—and I noticed yesterday that the Opposition Leader sought to refer to his homework, when he was a young person. That's called a budget. I've done three as a Treasurer, three as a Prime Minister and one as the member of the Expenditure Review Committee. That's what you need when it comes—

The Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order?

On relevance: the question was about the price of beef going up, as an example of pressures on the cost of living. The Prime Minister spoke—

The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. No-one can hear you, Leader of the Opposition. I will say to the Prime Minister that the question was quite specific around cost of living, and I would ask the Prime Minister to return to the question.

Thank you, Mr Speaker; I'm addressing what the pressures on inflation are in this country, which goes to cost of living. And an important way to ensure that we can control those inflationary pressures is the financial management of the government. That financial management has ensured that Australia has maintained its AAA credit rating throughout the worst global pandemic we've seen in 100 years, and that is putting downward pressure on inflation. And that's why in Australia we are seeing inflation at less than it is in the United States and the United Kingdom. But let's compare the pair when it comes to—

No, there's no 'compare the pair'. The question was not asking for alternative—

Mr Speaker, let me address cost of living, and I make this simple point: electricity prices under our government since September 2018 have fallen by 2.9 per cent.

The member for Corangamite, you are so close.

Under Labor they went up by 12.9 per cent. Food and beverages have gone up by 2.4 per cent, and we acknowledge that. In clothing and footwear it has been largely flat. On issues of communications, they have fallen by 2.6 per cent since I became Prime Minister. They went up by 0.8 per cent under Labor. Health costs—

The Prime Minister will resume his seat. Manager of Opposition Business, if you were going to raise point of order in relation to relevance, don't bother, because I was just conversing with the member for Corangamite because she was yelling out, so I didn't hear what the Prime Minister said.

The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.

On a point of order, the Prime Minister is now going to the cost of communications, in an answer—

Government members interjecting—

That's what he went to. He went to the cost of communications and, Mr Speaker, given your previous ruling—that is defying the ruling that you gave. How on earth is communications relevant to prices of beef going up over eight years? The cattle don't use the phone!

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The question that was asked—and, really, the Manager of Opposition Business knows full well that the Prime Minister is being relevant at this time, because he's dealing with the cost-of-living issues. The Prime Minister has the call.

The Labor Party might not think that what people have to pay on their phone bill and on their communications cost—they may think that's irrelevant to the family cost of living, but I don't. Another important cost of living is housing costs, which are putting a lot of pressure on Australians. In the last 3½ years of our government, housing costs went up by 1.1 per cent. In the last 3½ years under Labor, they went up by 4.3 per cent. And, as a direct result of the housing policies of our government, more than 300,000 Australians have been helped into buying their own homes— (Time expired)

My question is to the Special Minister of State. Will the minister explain to the House the importance of protecting Australia's electoral system from foreign influence and the actions the Morrison government is taking to combat foreign influence in our elections?

I thank the member of Barker for his question, knowing his concern for foreign influences in our democracy, because now more than ever we must be alert and ensure we have the appropriate laws in place to stop foreign entities, foreign governments, foreign companies and foreign foundations from infiltrating our Australian electoral system. Only Australians should influence the Australian electoral system. Only Australian money should be used to influence Australians and how they cast a vote. And, when money is received by anybody, it needs to be appropriately disclosed in accordance with the laws of this land.

But our national security agencies are warning us about threats to our democracy from overseas. The ASIO director-general recently unveiled that they had disrupted a foreign interference plot in the lead-up to an Australian electoral event—

The member for Lalor will leave under 94(a).

The ASIO director-general said:

… we are seeing attempts at foreign interference at all levels of government, in all states and territories.

In their annual threat assessment ASIO revealed that a person linked to a foreign government recently attempted to fund political candidates in an unspecified Australian election. They were doing the bidding of offshore masters, knowingly and covertly seeking to advance the interests of the foreign power and, in that process, undermine our sovereignty. That's why this government has introduced the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Foreign Influences and Offences) Bill that we hope to see pass this House today. This builds on our reforms in 2018 to ensure that foreign donations to Australian political parties are banned. Last year the government successfully tightened laws to ensure that these foreign donation bans were also applied to Independents and to the associated entities that support them.

The passage of this bill will stop foreign governments, along with foreign businesses, foreign organisations and foreign foundations, from influencing and directly running election campaigns in Australia. There are those who want to undermine our democratic system and our processes, and they will do so by using their foreign money to spread deception and doubt in our electoral processes.

There are those overseas—foreign governments, foreign businesses and foreign charities—that will seek to replace sitting members of parliament with their choices for candidates. They will seek to elect the parties of their choice over those who they don't want to see govern. We must be alert to the risks of foreign interference in our elections. It is the responsibility of this parliament to pass this bill today, and to take the threats to our democracy seriously.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Why does the Prime Minister always fail to anticipate problems before they occur, fail to listen to expert warnings and act too little, too late? Why doesn't he ever do his job?

I thank the member for the opportunity to tell you about the job we've been doing, and this is just since late 2021. There is record high employment. The economy added 64,800 jobs in December, taking employment to a record high of 13.2 million.

On 27 November, 39 million vaccinations—86.7 per cent; 16-plus fully vaccinated; 411,000 boosters administered; vaccinations for five- to 11-year-old had not commenced. On 6 February, 51 million vaccinations; 93.7 per cent of over 16s fully vaccinated; 8.9 million boosters administered; and over one million five- to 11-year-olds, or 45 per cent, have had their first dose of a vaccine.

We closed the borders to high-risk countries in southern Africa to slow infections on 27 November. We have opened all of those borders since then, and we are welcoming foreign tourists back into Australia.

We convened on numerous occasions. In the meetings of state premiers and chief ministers to work through the omicron variant that was impacting Australians, we changed the rules when it came to close contacts and we arrested the issues that were occurring in our supply chains. There was $9.8 billion in additional health funding announced in the midyear statement, including $308.6 million to make telehealth services permanent. This government has made telehealth services permanent.

We activated the private hospital agreement to enable 100,000 private healthcare staff and 57,000 nurses to help with the management of COVID. We increased MBS incentive payments by $10 per booster shot to drive the booster program. We supported Australia's aged-care workforce, with an additional $800 bonus payment. We approved $116 million in additional funding for rapid antigen tests into residential aged-care facilities. We announced free tests for 6.6 million pensioners and Commonwealth concession cardholders. The National Coordination Mechanism activated to address the supply chain issues we were facing. There was $24 million for telehealth to support GPs, specialists and their patients to stay connected, and over 20 million units of PPE was provided.

We concluded the reciprocal access agreement with the government of Japan—something we've been working on for many years. The reciprocal access agreement with Japan is the first such agreement Japan has signed with any country anywhere in the world. We were able to land the first comprehensive strategic partnership with the ASEAN countries—before any other nation in the world. We increased funding for headspace. We announced the two antiviral COVID-19 treatments approved by the TGA. A new Moderna sovereign vaccine manufacturing facility will be built in Victoria to produce the respiratory mRNA vaccines for future pandemics. We're getting on with the job. This Labor Party— (Time expired)

My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and the Minister for Defence Personnel. Will the minister inform the House how the Morrison government is continuing to support veterans and their families, including through legislative reform?

I thank the member for Leichhardt for his question and acknowledge his outstanding nine-year record of service with the Royal Australian Air Force and also his role as patron of the Vietnam Veterans Motorcycle Club.

Yesterday was National Servicemen's Day, when our nation paused to honour and remember the enormous contribution of Australia's nashos, including the more than 15,000 who served in the Vietnam War, the over 1,200 who were wounded and the 200 who lost their lives in that conflict. Today, we also remember the fall of Singapore and those tragic events of this day in 1942. Tomorrow we'll pause to remember the Bangka Island massacre where 22 women, including 21 Australian nurses, and up to 60 Commonwealth servicemen and merchant sailors were brutally killed after Singapore fell. Only Sister Vivian Bullwinkel survived the war. It's a reminder of the extraordinary courage and sacrifice of the men and women who have served our nation in uniform.

One living example of service and sacrifice is Bill Wilcox, a proud nasho from Oberon. As a young man, he had one dream, and that was to play for South Sydney. He got to play one trial game in the red and green before duty called. He got a call back but had to report for national service. On 21 July 1969, the same day that Neil Armstrong was walking on the moon, Bill was hit by a mine in the jungles of Vietnam. It was part of the tragic chain of events that is referred to in that iconic Redgum song I was only 19. To this day, he has dozens of pieces of shrapnel in his body. He was read his last rites at the time. He pulled through, but his mate didn't.

The responsibility to care for the men and women of the ADF, veterans and their families currently rests with our generation, and we have to do everything we can to give them the best possible care and treatment our country can provide. That's why tomorrow I'll be introducing legislation providing an expanded support package for vulnerable veterans and their families and the widowed spouses and partners of ADF members. It includes child support, home assistance and also wellbeing and counselling support. I encourage all members of this House to get behind this important legislation.

I also ask members of this House and the Australian public today to pause just for a moment to remember the extraordinary sacrifice of the men and women who gave so much during those dark and desperate days during the fall of Singapore and also the shocking and tragic events of the Bangka Island massacre. Lest we forget.

Honourable members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.

A document is tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the document will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

I wish to make a personal explanation.

Does the Leader of the Opposition claim to have been misrepresented?

I do, Mr Speaker, and we'd be here for some time if I went through all of them.

The Leader of the Opposition has the call.

I will pick one, which is that the Treasurer, in his comments, continues to refer to my 'school paper' on economics. It was actually a paper, which I wanted to table, for my Bachelor of Economics degree—something that his opponents here and here don't have.

I have received a letter from the honourable the Leader of the Opposition proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The failure of the Government to do its job.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Indeed this is a government that never does its job, because it's too riven by disunity, dysfunction and dishonesty, and that's rendering it incapable of moving the country forward. The central characteristics that define this government mean that it's just not competent.

I've been Leader of the Opposition for three summers now. In the first summer, of course, we had the bushfire crisis, characterised by a Prime Minister who said, whilst in an interview in Hawaii, 'I don't hold a hose, mate.' The guy who doesn't hold a hose but wants your kid to drive a forklift—that's this Prime Minister. Of course, during that period he did come back, and he went through a period where he forced people who had been impacted by those bushfires to shake his hand.

The period was full of announcements. Something that's also characterised this government is announcement and then, 'Job done,' with no delivery. He announced $4 billion in the Emergency Response Fund. Of that, we know now that not one cent has been spent on recovery—not one cent. During that period, $836 million in interest payments has been added to the fund. This isn't a disaster recovery fund; this is more like a term deposit for the government, at a time when people in those communities are still living in caravans.

Of course, we know as well that, during that period, the Premier of New South Wales had this to say: that it was always about the politics. Gladys Berejiklian said, 'Lives are at stake today and he is just obsessed with petty political pointscoring.' We saw that again today. We had serious questions from the member from Eden-Monaro and the member for Gilmore, and how were they responded to by this government? Without any shame at all, this Prime Minister went out and spruiked the former member for Bega—not the current member for Bega, because that's a member of the Labor Party, Dr Holland, but the former member. The backlash against the Liberal Party is there for all to see, because Bega is a seat that's been there since the 19th century, and Labor had never held that seat, but we do today.

The second summer was, of course, the summer of vaccinations, when countries around the world were racing to get vaccinations to protect their populations. But for this Prime Minister it wasn't a race, so we ran right at the bottom of the queue. For a long time, we were barely in the top 100 countries, and as a result, of course, the booster rollout is later than in other parts of the world.

The third summer was, of course, the summer of rapid antigen tests, the crisis in aged care and the crisis for people with disabilities—the crisis for really vulnerable people in our community. There his response was: 'It's not my job; it's someone else's job. It's always for the states to respond.' We've seen over 700 people lose their lives in aged care. We see older Australians who've helped to build this country unable to get access to adequate food and water and unable to be showered. People are dying on their own, separated from their loved ones, because of this government's failure.

But, of course, we know that this is a Prime Minister who always chooses the political road and never looks at what the right thing is for the country. As the former Premier said, it's always about politics, not people, with this Prime Minister. That's reflected in all the characteristics of the government if you go through. We have a treasurer who's described by the Australian Financial Review as 'lighter than helium', and we see that every day at the dispatch box, with this absurd research being done, combing through the websites, combing through what people said at school and going through people's garbage looking for notes. It's just pathetic. He is the Treasurer who has presided over $1 trillion of debt, who has committed $60 billion errors in his adding up and who has not put in place appropriate protections for taxpayers' interests when it comes to the JobKeeper program, resulting in over $20 billion going to companies that were increasing their profits. He's a Treasurer without an economic reform agenda going forward.

Of course, we have a defence minister who thinks that national security is a political football, a defence minister who wants to speak about security but can't speak for one minute out of every three about those issues. We have a health minister who could have taken his moment to shine but has been reduced to a minor character in a Shakespearean tragedy. That's what this health minister has done. And we have a Deputy Prime Minister who perhaps its best to just say is an embarrassment, a national embarrassment to the country, and one who we hope campaigns throughout the country in both cities and regions. I say to the Deputy Prime Minister: you are welcome anywhere at all!

But this government is always about the politics, which is why it commits so many errors and why it doesn't deserve a second decade in office. We saw that last week with the chaos around the Religious Discrimination Bill. Here it is: a concept, an idea, that's supported by just about everyone in this parliament, I would hope. The idea that you shouldn't be discriminated against because of your faith is certainly something that Labor supports. But the government couldn't even get it right because they were too busy trying to play wedge politics and be clever. They wedged themselves and fell apart on the floor of this parliament and ended up voting against their own legislation. Then, when the amendment was carried consistent with what the Prime Minister had put to me in writing on 1 December and what he had told and leaked publicly to the media last December, he walked away from the legislation, but not before trying to do a deal in the cabinet about a national integrity commission, saying he would be prepared to bring it forward. He would not actually pass it. He was just doing a little trick to try to get the crossbenchers and some of his own party back on side. But he got rolled in his own cabinet room.

How do we know that? It's because this is a cabinet that leaks so hard it feels more like a dam bursting. These leaks are flooding out from the cabinet, from those opposite. Day after day, we have to put up with the leadership struggle in full view, a Prime Minister sitting there while Bill and Ben over there compete with each other on how they're going. Today we saw that even the Safer Communities Fund has been rorted by this government. It's a government that's good at rorts but not very good at RATs for people.

We on this side will continue to hold the government to account, but we will also be campaigning on a positive future, a better future for Australia, one where there's secure work, one where there are higher living standards, with wages being lifted while we make child care more affordable, where we have Medicare at the centre of the health system and where we have a future made in Australia. Have you noticed in two weeks there's been not a single question about our climate and energy policy released more than two months ago? It's a policy that will create 604,000 new jobs, will reduce power prices by $275, includes $52 billion of private sector investment, will reduce emissions by 43 per cent by 2030 and is supported by the Business Council of Australia, the National Farmers Federation, the ACTU, ACCI and the Australian Industry Group. That is what real policy does to take a country forward. That's along with our national reconstruction fund and our 'buy Australia' plan, which will support Australian industry, Australian jobs and Australian economic growth.

But instead we have a great pretender, someone who pretends he's a hair shampooer, pretends he's a fighter pilot, pretends he's a race car driver and pretends he's a ukulele player. He's someone who acts as the Prime Minister. He should just do his job. I have been acting Prime Minister before, in 2013. This guy has been acting Prime Minister since 2018, because he hasn't done his job. (Time expired)

They've heard it all before, I have to say. This mob have got form. The Australian people know exactly what would happen if they came to government in a Labor-Greens alliance. I rarely get an opportunity to talk about my local electorate and doing our job and what it means for the people whom I represent, and I want to talk for a little piece just about what happens locally.

In terms of delivery, we are getting on with it. The Hinkler Regional Deal is a $170 million commitment from the Commonwealth. What has that resulted in? There is an upgrade to Boundary Road at Hervey Bay. That might not mean too much to the people in the chamber, but for the people of Hervey Bay it is a third crossing across the city, one that'll connect from Urangan all the way back to the main road out of town. It is one that will reduce congestion. It is one that will assist emergency services, particularly when they are trying to get from one end of the city to the other.

The palliative care facility at Hervey Bay is now complete and operational as part of the Hinkler Regional Deal. It is a facility that will be used by people in the local electorate for many years into the future. When they are at the most difficult period of their life, at the end of their time, they want to spend that time in a homelike environment. It is the commitment from this government that has delivered that palliative care facility for Hervey Bay and for the people of the region, who will go on to use it for many years.

The Hervey Bay town centre upgrade is well underway in terms of its planning. A lot of the consultation has been completed, and it will make a significant difference to the town of Hervey Bay. It will actually put a centre into Hervey Bay, an area that, as you know, Mr Deputy Speaker O'Brien, has grown from a number of seaside coastal villages all the way through to what is now a thriving city which is growing incredibly fast. A lot of people are moving to Hervey Bay.

On top of what we've already done, there is a $6 million facility that has been built in Bundaberg for both LifeFlight and the Royal Flying Doctor Service. It includes new hangars and new facilities. Under the regional deal we provided $15 million that will be put towards a training facility for the Royal Flying Doctor Service—a simulator for their new King Airs or whatever type of aircraft they might decide to put in place. That will be in Bundaberg, and we're looking forward to the construction getting underway very soon, because, quite simply, these are the people that regional people rely on. They rely on the Royal Flying Doctor Service in their time of need. When they are out to the west, when they're out to the north, when they're out in the bush and they find themselves in a difficult position, whether that is through injury or illness, the Royal Flying Doctor Service are the ones they rely on to provide them with support to get them to further help, and we are here supporting the RFDS.

As part of the deal in Bundaberg, there will be a common conveyor. It doesn't sound like much for the Bundaberg port, but what I can tell you is that the Queensland state Labor government took more than two years to approve a simple conveyor to allow us to have more businesses working at the Bundaberg port, more economic activity and more jobs. Two years—that is simply outrageous. Of course, the costs of construction have now increased, and this means that it will be more challenging to get this built. But get it built we will, because it is important for our local economy. We have a port that has been reliant on the local sugar industry, which clearly is in decline. We have lost a number of local sugar mills, which means a loss in production, and this means a loss in capacity needed at the Bundaberg port. We need to expand its operations, and a common conveyor will allow things like timber pallets to be exported more successfully, whether that be into the resources sector in the western regions around Biggenden and whether that be elsewhere. The Bundaberg port has the ability to drive our local economy forward for the whole region. I know no-one knows more about this than you, Mr Deputy Speaker, in terms of what we need to drive our local region forward.

This week we committed $600 million to the Paradise Dam. That is $600 million of taxpayer support. It breaks my heart that we've had to do this, it really does. It is $600 million that could have gone towards a level 5 hospital in Bundaberg. It is $600 million that could have gone to extending the duplication of the Bruce Highway. It is $600 million that could have gone to further economic development. Instead, it is $600 million that is going towards fixing Queensland Labor's mistakes.

We should never forget the history of this dam built by the Beattie government. At a cost of around $300 million, it was built to a price and not to a standard, and what has resulted? They have spent tens of millions of dollars in repairs over the last 15 years. They spent over $100 million to knock down the existing wall. They released 100,000 megalitres of water that farmers were desperate for in the midst of a drought. And now it will take $1,200 million to repair this piece of equipment, this infrastructure that we desperately need.

We recognise it has to be fixed. We recognise it must be fixed. We need it for reliability of water for my local community and we need it to ensure confidence for our local agricultural sector and, of course, for water supply to the city of Bundaberg. The fact that we have to ensure a $1,200 million repair gets done is solely due to the Queensland Labor government's incompetence. It is appalling that this is where it has ended up. This is the biggest failure of public infrastructure in this country 's history. We will repair it, we will assist in the repair and we will make sure it happens. But, as the Deputy Prime Minister said, it has to be done in a certain time frame; we're not going to have the state government sitting around on their hands for the next 10 years. It has to be constructed. And we'll be supporting construction—not state required regulations or inquiries or more reports. It just needs to be fixed, and that is what we're looking to support.

I want to give a shout-out to some of the local community who fought hard to make sure this happens. That includes people like Janelle Gerry, at Macadamias Australia, and the whole Steinhardt family; Jamie Hansen, at Childers; and Bree Grima, from Bundaberg Fruit and Vegetable Growers. There are so many out there who took on this fight themselves. They put forward their own money. In fact, I am of the understanding that there is a lawsuit being looked at against the state Labor government about what has happened to this community. There have been a lot of sleepless nights for people who have invested their hard-earned money. Tens of millions of dollars has been invested in things like macadamia crops off the back of the reliability that was given by this dam. There was roughly 92 per cent reliability for water supply every single year. Last year it was 14 per cent. Currently that has improved because we have had rain. But the idea that we can have this move forward and remain in the current situation is unacceptable. That is why we put $600 million on the table to make sure that simply doesn't happen.

I'm very pleased that we're getting on with the job locally. It is the job of government to deliver things like this because it matters for our local economy, it matters for our local people and it matters for jobs. We as a government are very proud of our history and what we've done in the last three years. That includes ensuring the creation of 1.1 million jobs since the pandemic hit. It hasn't gone down; it has increased by 1.1 million since the pandemic hit. I want to thank all the hardworking men and women. Whether they are working in the resources sector, in the Murray-Darling Basin, in a small-to-medium business or elsewhere, they have simply done what they had to do. They have pulled this country through in terms of our economy due to their commitment, the risks they take and what they have delivered.

There have been 700,000 jobs saved through JobKeeper. We have 71.3 per cent of trade and exports now covered by free trade agreements. What does that mean to an individual? Quite simply, it means your job is secure if you're related to an export trade. If we look at the resources sector, we know that China, for example, has made some decisions which clearly we don't agree with. It meant there were exports from this country which were no longer being accepted and purchased by China. Free trade agreements mean we have options for those exports to go elsewhere. We as a government have spent time securing those agreements with other countries, and that is exactly what has happened. In my own portfolio, we have seen the resources sector increase exports into places like Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and India. I thank those nations for picking up that trade; it is incredibly important.

We in this country absolutely rely on what happens in the resources sector for the economy. Whether it is in the Murray-Darling Basin or elsewhere, it is how we pay for the essential services that Australians rely on. Could you imagine where this country would be positioned without the record economic contribution of the resources sector? In a year, it has provided $34 billion in taxes and royalties to state and federal governments. This is how we pay our bills. This is how we ensure that those hospitals are available. This is how we can commit $600 million to the Paradise Dam repairs.

Quite simply, we continue to build the economy, we continue to provide opportunities through free trade agreements and we continue to train Australians. And that is something I'm incredibly proud of—220,000 trade apprentices. That is the highest number since records began in 1963. I'm incredibly proud of what the resources sector is doing. Right across small and medium enterprises, they are engaging, they are employing new apprentices and trainees and they are providing opportunities for them to learn a trade, to learn a skill which they will utilise into the future—as I did as a skinny kid on 13 January 1987. I'm not quite as salubrious now in terms of the hair! It's not quite the same colour. And I might have gained a couple of kilos—as the member for Riverina is reminding me from the benches. A trade gives you opportunity, a trade means you can pay your own way and a trade means you can get on with life. I'm very pleased that we're helping to make that opportunity occur.

This is a government that has been failing to do its job and a Prime Minister who has been failing to do his job, and it is the people of Australia who suffer as a consequence of the Prime Minister's and the government's failure to do their jobs. What has this government been up to in recent times? You might have thought that they might have been trying to address the RAT shortage, or that they might have been trying to address job insecurity, or that, in my portfolio, they might have been trying to address their own failures to deliver recovery plans for threatened species or their failures in relation to the Murray-Darling Basin—but no.

Here's a catalogue of some of the things this government has been up to in recent times. Let's start with voting against their own antidiscrimination legislation. They voted against it, which was quite a shock to all of us who had spent a significant amount of time in the parliament advocating for antidiscrimination and antivilification provisions in relation to faith. They voted against their own legislation in the face of that debate.

They have also been spending their time looking up speeches made in 1991. I remember 1991 pretty well. I was in year 9 at Cairns State High School and it was a good year, but I don't think anyone would really care what I had to say in 1991 about anything. Yet we've got this desperate Treasurer and this desperate government sitting around trawling through the Leader of the Opposition's speeches from 1991 because they can't be bothered doing their jobs. They'd rather play up and play political games instead.

What else have they been doing? Trawling through minor-party websites. The Treasurer has the highlighter out and he's been getting printouts of the minor-party websites, looking for things he can highlight so he can bring them into question time and run an amazing 'gotcha'. What a crushing blow that is when you find something on a minor-party website and you wave it around in question time!

What else? Well, they've clearly all been auditioning for the Liberal Party leadership. That's very much what's on the minds of the Minister for Defence and the Treasurer himself. They all think the Prime Minister is a chance to be gone pretty soon, given his woeful performance as Prime Minister.

What else have they been doing? They have been leaking against each other. Who is leaking what? Cabinet leaks? We're hearing from Channel Ten there is another story on leaks tonight. They are a government so busy fighting each other that they cannot be bothered fighting for the people of Australia. That's who this government is. That's what they're spending their time doing.

What else have they been doing? Media stunts. Running their fingers through strangers' hair. They've been playing the ukulele. I would never hold playing the ukulele against someone—it is a terrific instrument; we've all heard that beautiful Hawaiian cover of 'Over the Rainbow', which is absolutely lovely—but why is the Prime Minister playing a Hawaiian instrument on national television when Australians are crying out for the aged-care crisis to be fixed, for RATs to be delivered, for the vaccine rollout to be done properly and for GPs to have certainty of supply? Why is the Prime Minister doing media stunts instead of his actual job?

What else have they been spending time on? Defending their rorts. We heard in question time today about the real-world consequences. When the Safer Communities Fund was rorted, it meant that important projects missed out; we spoke about that in question time today.

What else have they been doing? We had the Deputy Prime Minister offering his resignation over a text message criticising the Prime Minister. This is the amount of chaos this government is in. And it is an absolute disgrace, because while they are doing these things, while they are being self-indulgent and engaging in these political games, in this one-upmanship, in this backgrounding, in this leaking, in this texting, they are not standing up for the people of Australia. They are doing nothing to deliver a better future.

What else have they been doing? In my electorate they've been managing to make stuff up about an Aussie manufacturer who then had to take to the media to correct an incorrect claim this Prime Minister had made about their business on national television. Australian manufacturers deserve a government that will stand up for them, not attack them and make stuff up about them. That's what they deserve, and they will not get it, unfortunately, under this Prime Minister and this government.

I mentioned my portfolio. I want to mention two things. Firstly, on the environment, the government should have been doing its job and delivering a koala recovery plan. They have not done it; it's six years late. Secondly, on water, the minister managed to disregard a requirement of the Water Act that the second Review of the Water for the Environment Special Account be provided to him by the end of September and that he table it within 15 sitting days afterwards. It has been much more than that, and it has not happened.

With apologies to Zach Galifianakis, playing Marty Huggins on The Campaign: I am an Australian, and I believe in Australian ingenuity and hard work—unlike my friends opposite, who believe that everyone should live in rainbow land. I'm referring to a doctrine written by the opposition leader called The Neoclassical Theory of the Competitive Market System. It's handwritten—in 1981. He tried to table it in question time yesterday. I think anybody that writes about the redistribution of wealth sounds like someone we don't need to elect. Am I right? Of course I am.

This matter of public importance debate is not Hollywood, nor is it political satire, but with the carry-on of the Labor-Greens voices for rainbow land alliance you'd be forgiven for thinking that we are in some sort of American comedy. But we are not. We do not live in rainbow land. Things aren't always for free, and certainly anything that the opposition leader comes up with that he handed in as a high school assignment really belongs to political satire.

We've heard in question time again today, with the Prime Minister and the Treasurer reminding the House and reminding the people of Australia, that those opposite stood for $387 billion of higher taxes should they have been elected at the last election—a retirees' tax and a housing tax. Indeed, they wanted to reach into the wallets and the purses of everyday, ordinary Australians—all Australians—and take their hard-earned money. Well, we on this side of the House stand for Australians keeping more of what they earn. That is our doctrine. That is our philosophy. It is not rainbow land.

The jobless rate is 4.2 per cent. It was 4.2 per cent in the Howard years. It went up to 5.7 per cent under those Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years, and of course now it's back down to 4.2 per cent. Why is that so? That is because we know that by backing small businesses and businesses they will invest in Australians. They will invest in apprentices. We heard the minister in response to the opposition leader talk about a record number of 220,000 trade apprentices who've been given a start, given an opportunity, given perhaps their first crack at a job, under the policies of the Liberals and the Nationals. It's not rainbow land. It's not some sort of high school assignment to put in.

An honourable member interjecting—

I can hear the singing! Get in tune, maybe; it's not quite there yet! In regional Australia the unemployment rate is 3.8 per cent, and that is a remarkable number. That's almost full employment.

We heard the Prime Minister talking in question time today about us—Australia, the nation—retaining our AAA credit rating. Of all the countries in the world, we have done very well. According to the Johns Hopkins index, we're second in the world for our COVID preparedness response. That is credit to us, as a nation. I thank all Australians for the part that they've played and I thank the state premiers—all of them—for the part they've played and certainly the Prime Minister, the minister for health and all others involved in making sure that we kept Australians safe. We made sure that we protected lives and that we protected livelihoods with JobKeeper, with HomeBuilder and with all the other announcements that we have made, with all the other delivery that we put in place. This includes the 1.1 million jobs created since the pandemic hit and 11½ million Australians benefiting from tax relief, because we on this side believe in lower taxes. They on that side believe in higher taxes, taxing the billyo out of Australians. That's what they do. I can hear them carping and whining and whinging because they are offended by the fact that I am belling the cat when it comes to their higher taxing policies, policies that would lead to fewer Australians in work and policies that would lead to fewer women in work. We've got a very good record in that regard—putting more women into work. There were 700,000 jobs saved through JobKeeper, and you heard the minister talking about the free trade agreements. We will always back Australians. We, as Nationals, will always back country Australians. The regions are leading the way. That's what we're doing. (Time expired)

Apparently the Prime Minister this morning told his party room, 'You do your job and I'll do mine.' It really raises a question, doesn't it: why bother starting now? More than 700 people have died in aged care with COVID this year alone, and we're about halfway through February. Why bother starting to do your job now, Prime Minister?

Every day, what we get from the Prime Minister and the ministers on his front bench and some of his very loud and talkative backbenchers is an attempt to divert from the failures that are racking up. The failures aren't just failures of politics; they are failures to resolve real problems, like the crisis in aged care, nursing homes and disability homes that is going unaddressed because all the Prime Minister can do is think up ways to try to campaign in question time and have scare campaigns about the opposition.

My community—like, I assume, many communities around this country—don't actually ask for all that much from their politicians and their leaders. They don't ask that much from government, except that they want a government that works in their interests and looks after them, particularly in their times of need and vulnerability. They don't want a government that fails to plan, fails to take action when it's needed and then makes last-minute announcements to try to patch over problems and fool people into thinking that it's doing its job or announces, just before an election comes, 'Now I'm going to do my job.'

Who suffers? Vulnerable Australian people. Two days ago, the CEO of Palliative Care South East in my home state told the Guardian:

… in the first three weeks after Christmas, as Omicron spread, she thought: "Oh my goodness, how are we going to survive?"

She says:

We had 50% of our staff furloughed on one day, and then to 25% on most days during that first couple of weeks of spread. But everyone from administration to senior management worked so hard to keep everyone supported.

She says:

… aged care facilities restricting visitors to the elderly in the last days of their life to avoid Covid spread was leading to thousands of people traumatised by a feeling they were unable to give their loved ones a proper goodbye.

Why is this the case? Because we have a prime minister and an aged-care minister who not only failed to reform the aged-care system and plan for the first wave of COVID but then failed to learn from the mistakes in that first wave so that people didn't have to go through the same thing again this year. There was an abject failure, no matter what the Minister for Health and Aged Care says in question time, to respond to the recommendations of the aged-care royal commission. If this Prime Minister thinks that his announcement of this $800 bonus for aged-care workers, with the last $400 to come just before the election, is going to fool people in the aged-care sector and people whose families are in aged-care facilities into thinking that this government is doing something to deal with the crisis, he's fooling himself.

This is an email I got from the manager of a local aged-care facility. I can't read out all of it, but here are some pretty powerful points: 'I'm writing to you to share how absolutely gutted I am about the selective aged-care worker bonus that was announced today. Tears well in my eyes as I write this email. I'm feeling absolutely hopeless that fair and equitable real change and recognition will ever happen in our sector. My staff are absolutely devastated that the government once again seeks to divide our workers into those who are valued and those who are left wondering what they did wrong. The government refuses to recognise the very valuable contribution of all aged-care staff who work in residential aged-care facilities, and again the reception, maintenance and lifestyle staff are cast aside as unworthy of recognition. Our resident services coordinator rang the director of nursing absolutely sobbing this morning when she heard the announcement, wondering why staff don't matter to the government. The government doesn't care about what they do. Why bother starting to do your job now, Prime Minister? You can't do it.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been the greatest challenge that the world has faced since World War II. It's challenged leaders. It's challenged systems. It's challenged countries. Across the world 412 million people have had COVID, and sadly 5.8 million people have died. When you look around the world, under the leadership of the Morrison government, Australia has had one of the best responses in the world. I want to compare Australia's response to a range of other countries that we usually compare ourselves with.

When you look at our vaccination rate, our vaccination rate today is above 93 per cent. Canada's vaccination rate is 80 per cent. New Zealand's vaccination rate is 78 per cent. The UK's vaccination rate is 71 per cent. The US's vaccination rate is 64 per cent. Globally, 61 per cent of people are fully vaccinated. Australia is second only, according to my research, to South Korea in our level of vaccination per population in terms of countries that we would usually compare ourselves with.

While any death at any occasion is tragic, Australia's death rate is far lower than the countries that we would usually compare ourselves with. In the US alone nearly a million people have died. They've had 2,831 deaths per million. In the UK, over 160,000 people have died, which is 2,331 deaths per million. In Canada, 35,470 people have died. That's 930 deaths per million. In Australia, where over 4,600 people have sadly died, we are at 180 deaths per million. Every death is a tragedy, but our death rate is far lower than the countries that we would usual compare ourselves with.

At the same time that the COVID-19 pandemic has beset our country and the world, we have faced extraordinary defence and security challenges of the sort that we haven't seen for decades. Under the leadership of the Morrison government, we have stood up, and Australia has prepared itself and formed new alliances and hardened its defence spending and infrastructure. Whether that is through AUKUS, whether it is through the comprehensive strategic partnerships we now have with India, the Pacific nations, South Korea or whether it's the new defence agreements or the interoperability agreement with Japan, we are stepping up in our defence responsibilities. If you remember when we came to government, defence spending had dropped to pre World War II levels.

We live in an environment where the national security situation is far more complex than it's ever been, and it's the reason why we've brought in a whole range of important national security laws. Whether it's laws dealing with foreign interference or espionage, or critical infrastructure, or laws dealing with the ability to expel people who are visa holders who've committed violent crimes here, Australia has taken a tougher border security approach. It's appropriate we do so. The situation in Ukraine is a reminder of the instability of our world today. The world is falling into camps that we haven't seen since the Cold War, with Russia and China on one side and the rest of the world largely on the other.

Despite all the challenges, the Australian economy has proven itself to be highly resilient and well performing, again under the leadership of the Morrison government. We have a 4.2 per cent unemployment rate, the lowest in 13 years. Consumer confidence figures out today have seen an increase of three per cent. Australia has retained it's AAA credit rating, and 1.1 million new jobs have been created since the pandemic, and 300,000 Australians have been helped into their homes. Our power prices are the lowest they have been in eight years, and 11½ million taxpayers are benefiting from tax relief, including 57,000 families in my own electorate.

In my electorate the work of the Morrison government has delivered important milestones like NorthConnex, which has taken 6,000 trucks off Pennant Hills Road every single day—that's 20 per cent more than we had imagined. It's meant people can get around their community more quickly. It's meant that, for people who are living on Pennant Hills Road, the road is quieter, and there are fewer accidents. When we think of some of the infrastructure upgrades in our community, we think of Greenway Park; the $2.7 million that benefits all sorts of sporting bodies; and Pennant Hills Park, which has recently had it's DA approved and which will do the same. There's the money that's been spent in education, including the capital grant to Mount St Benedict College to allow that school to expand. All of these things are because of the leadership of the Morrison government. Whether it's at the global, at the national or at the community level in my electorate, the Morrison government continues to deliver for all Australians.

I rise to speak on this matter of public importance: Australians know all too well the failure of this government to do their job. The only job they want to do is to do a job on one another, and we saw about 10 minutes ago breaking news from Channel 10 that the Prime Minister is about to do a job on one of his ministers. Whatever happened to the party of, 'If you have a go, you get a go'? After three years of this Prime Minister, we've gone from, 'If you have a go, you get a go', to, now, 'We have a job to do; I'm going to do mine and I need you to do yours.' Inspiring stuff! It's a bit like the slogan in Futurama, 'You gotta do what you gotta do.'

We went from Tony Abbott, who—when he realised that things weren't going well for him—said, 'Good government starts today,' to Malcolm Turnbull, who promised stable government about three years into his term. And now the Prime Minister is promising to 'do his job'. Wouldn't it be nice if he had realised that he had a job to do at the start of this pandemic, rather than when we are two and a bit years in, if he'd started doing his job when people were telling him there was a crisis in aged care, if he'd started doing his job when people—including trade unions—were telling him to order rapid antigen tests or if he had done his job when people from Pfizer were saying, 'We'd like to speak to you about getting vaccinations for the people in your country.' If only he had done his job. I'm worried that we are going to repeat mistakes again and again under this government.

We saw the strategy from this Prime Minister where, every time something went wrong, he would blame the states. And then we saw in question time today the new strategy: blame the nation-states. When he was asked about the increasing cost of beef in Australia, he blamed it on the situation in Ukraine! Let's blame the nation-states. We know he likes to attack states—he has attacked the great state of Queensland many times and he attacks the great state of Western Australia on a regular basis. We've seen a number of times that he wants to attack Western Australia, so much so that he even wrote a cheque to cover Clive Palmer 's court costs.

What a disgrace!

It is disgraceful. We then saw the Deputy Prime Minister today talking about 'the forgotten roads'. Well, what about the forgotten state? The Deputy Prime Minister talks about infrastructure projects in every state and territory except one: Western Australia. I would love to see the Deputy Prime Minister come to Western Australia. I dare him to visit during the campaign. I'm sure that the same exemptions, in fact, that were available to Minister Dutton are also available to the Deputy Prime Minister, so if he wanted to come over he could.

Then we go to the never-ending digging into the essays, looking for this scrap—that is how hard this government has had to dig. Maybe it's that the Treasurer never said anything stupid when he was young—but he's making up for it now! This is a Treasurer described by the Australian Financial Review as 'lighter than helium', the same newspaper that revealed the member for Mackellar's plans for an inheritance tax. It is the only major party—this is from the chair of the economics committee, appointed by the Prime Minister—calling for death duties. This is spectacular. But we know that this government actually likes to float a lot of different ideas about taxes. When the Prime Minister was Treasurer he put out a plan to increase the GST. He said that increasing the GST was an 'opportunity', but then he was told off—slapped down. But this government successfully taxed young Australians when it introduced a knowledge tax to jack up the price of university degrees for Western Australians and for Australians across the board.

Then we get back to this government's deep, decades-long Liberal and National parties' entanglement with Clive Palmer. One of the jobs that this government doesn't do is stand up against Clive Palmer. At the moment, there is—I can't talk about it—a defamation case in the courts where Clive Palmer and the Premier of Western Australia are battling it out. I can assure you of this: you will never see a member of this government being sued by Clive Palmer for defamation. They have never ever stood up to Clive Palmer and they never will, because he is helping them try to get re-elected. (Time expired)

The opposition leader likes reminding us daily that he peaked in high school when he got an A on his economics test, but the Australian people and running government require adults making adult decisions, like on national security. The member opposite who just spoke mentioned Ukraine. This is an important lesson for the member opposite. He may have liked to have looked up economics 101 before coming into the chamber. The impact of gas prices in regard to the issues going on with Ukraine is directly related to Australia's issues around cost of living, which the Prime Minister addressed today in question time. When we are talking about adults making adult decisions and the Morrison government, we have to look at our achievements when it comes to the economy and getting our country through the pandemic and retaining our AAA rating. When we look at strengthening our national security, we need to look at which government, the coalition or a Labor-Greens government, will be best placed to ensure Australians have strong borders, with national security at the forefront of everything they do.

Looking at how we can best deliver for our local communities is what I like to talk about most. Also delivering jobs is something I'm really passionate about in my community of Lindsay. Since the pandemic hit, it's quite an achievement that over 1.1 million jobs have been created. Many thousands of these jobs—in fact, 28,000—will be delivered with the construction of Western Sydney airport. This is a national delivery. It's a job getting done nationally, a great achievement for the Morrison government but also a great local achievement. This is game changing for Western Sydney, linking us to the world when it comes to produce, in particular, and getting our produce across the world quickly.

Another thing I would like to talk about when it comes to getting the job done is supporting women and also the packages that we are delivering for women in the workforce but also, as the minister talked about today, ensuring that women and children are safe. I was really proud, again, to deliver on an election commitment for caseworkers for Penrith to ensure that women escaping domestic violence are looked after. This is something I'm really, really proud of.

We are talking about delivering for community. There is nothing I like talking about more than delivering my plan for Lindsay. I've been working hard for three years to do this. There are infrastructure projects like the fully funded Dunheved Road upgrade of $127 million. This will ensure that people in my community can get to where they are going and home again safer and quicker. There's nothing we want more than that for people. We are also ensuring that we have healthy active living spaces. There is nothing that people love more than the Nepean River. I worked really hard to deliver upgrades to the Nepean River, ensuring that the river is kept healthy for people and children to enjoy for generations to come.

We're also delivering $1.2 million to the Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre, which will ensure kids can get the best access to sporting facilities there. Also in Kingswood, with Chapman Gardens, there's an upgrade that will benefit softball, cricket and rugby league. This is making sure that our kids have access to fantastic facilities so they can live their dreams of becoming future sports stars or just staying healthy, which is really, really important for all our local children.

One of the members opposite talked about supporting manufacturing. There's nothing I'm more passionate about than supporting manufacturing in Western Sydney, with over 600 local manufacturers. That's what we've been doing through the instant asset write-off. When I go to manufacturers around my electorate, they tell me about the infrastructure that they have been able to invest in and the way that this Morrison government measure has changed their business. It's enabled them to upgrade and employ more people and, importantly, more apprentices, many more thousands of apprentices, actually a record number of 220,000 trade apprentices, which is a record high under the Morrison government, because we're getting on with the job of delivering for the Australian people.

I always love it when the government brings up the instant asset cash write-off, because it's a proud policy initiative of the former member for Lilley during the Rudd government. I will pass along your compliments and your regards to him that his legacy endures in the House for the members of the government, such a good policy that it was.

It seems as though, over the last three years, the Prime Minister has done every single job but his own. He came to Geebung in my electorate of Lilley to hammer a nail into a piece of wood on an empty construction site. He washed a lady's hair in the member for Dunkley's electorate. He was a footy water boy. He's cosplayed a truck driver, a pilot and a race car driver. He's played at everybody's job but his own. He doesn't hold a hose, but he wants your kid to drive a forklift.

We also have a Treasurer who is more focused on trawling his opponent's websites to throw mud than to develop policies that will help the household budget of a working family in Boondall or Sandgate. A polite heads-up: it speaks volumes about this government and this Treasurer if he thinks that the vital infrastructure portfolio is not inextricably linked to economic development, economic management and the federal budget.

While the Prime Minister is gallivanting around the country trawling innocent shopfronts of the outer suburbs for photo opportunities, and the Treasurer busies himself on his little screen in the wee hours with dishonest and unhinged scare campaigns, ordinary working families in Australia are not getting a look in. The cost of living is skyrocketing. Real wages are going down. Forty per cent of young Australians have never had a permanent full-time job. This is the price that Australians are paying for a government that's been in office for a decade now—and, with a straight face, it's asking for a second.

The Prime Minister's failure to do his job has made it harder for northsiders living in my electorate of Lilley to make a decent living and find local, high-skilled, secure jobs of their own. At a time when productivity and wages are flatlining, vocational education and training have the potential to grow the economy and sustain the secure, well-paid jobs in Lilley. New data from the National Centre for Vocational Education has revealed that fewer trainees and apprenticeships are finishing their course than in previous years under Labor. In Lilley, 8,000 trainees and apprentices have finished their traineeship or apprenticeship under the last Labor government. But under the coalition, under this government, only 4,722 apprentices and trainees have finished their course over the same amount of time—that is, 3,278 fewer apprentices and trainees who have finished their course. That is a 41 per cent decrease in hairdressers, carpenters, fully qualified electricians, mechanics and chefs on the northside.

This is not a coincidence or happenstance; it is a consequence of years of coalition cuts to federal TAFE and vocational training budgets. The Morrison government's 2021-22 federal budget slashed TAFE funding by 24 per cent. It really is just another example of the Morrison government failing young people. They are all spin and no action when it comes to jobs and training. Young people living on the northside need a genuine strategic plan so that they have the skills required for the jobs of the future in digital, new energy and advanced manufacturing. We know that that is the ticket to a lifetime of opportunity. And we know that vocational education graduates are valuable workers and contribute tens of billions of dollars to the economy each year. That is why an Albanese Labor government will invest 450,000 free TAFE places in sectors with critical skills shortages.

Manufacturing start-ups in my electorate like GEM Energy in Pinkenba, Triple Eight Race Engineering and Vaulta in Wavell Heights have demonstrated local businesses capability to innovate and produce goods that improve our quality of life, create new jobs and boost our economy. I recently visited the headquarters of Vaulta, which is a modest enterprise in Wavell Heights. The founder and director, Dominic Spooner, is on a mission to make batteries more recyclable by designing a reusable battery casing to create less waste and a lighter product. An Albanese Labor government will invest $15 billion in the National Reconstruction Fund to partner with businesses like these to rebuild industries and to create well-paid, secure jobs for all Australians.

According to a leak from the coalition party room this morning, the Prime Minister told his party that he was going to do his job and that they should do their job. It is revelatory stuff, nearly 10 years into the gig! And, as we speak here in the House, we await the latest leak from the Morrison cabinet to air on tonight's news—the third cabinet leak in a week. Apparently the PM is preparing to sack one of his own ministers, and there are so many options! Which— (Time expired)

Australian youth are leading the way in their grit and determination in the wake of COVID-19, and I thank young Australians right throughout this country for what they've been doing. In December alone, employment rose by 64,800 and most of this was youth employment. Youth unemployment has now dropped below 10 per cent, which was a personal goal of mine. It's fantastic that this has happened, and there is more work to do. I say to young people throughout Australia: we're with you, we're right behind you and there's a great opportunity right now to find work, with jobs and labour in high demand.

Youth are our future, and that's why this government will continue to invest in them. Think about skills and TAFE and everything that we're investing there. The Morrison government has invested some $7.1 billion this year alone in skills and training. We don't hear that from those opposite. We hear negativity, as usual. This is double what we were investing pre the pandemic—$7.1 billion this year alone in skills, training and TAFE. There are a record 220,000 apprentices in trade training—the highest number since records began in 1963. That's how the Australian government is taking decisive action and has set the stage for our economy to bounce back.

This is happening right across the country. Because of this, there are more people in work and we're able to invest in our local communities. In my own local community in Griffin, we're about to start the Henry Road upgrades. Moreton Bay Regional Council, along with $4 million from the Australian government, is about to upgrade Henry Road, and the people in Griffin know that this is much needed. We've also just pumped $200,000 into Osprey House, which is an environmental centre in Griffin in my electorate. That will enable major refurbishments this year. This great for the local environment. Previously we did a Green Army project down there, and we are seeing eucalypts planted six years ago now maturing for koalas. We've also made bird boxes and built a birdwatching hide down there. It's a great spot down near the water at Dohles Rocks. Get on down there. I and the member for Dickson have also invested in USC University, which is the only university now in the Moreton Bay region. We've upgraded the Bruce Highway, which is really important as well.

Tax relief is so important, and the Morrison government has legislated tax relief for Australians. This is really important. At the last election in 2019, there was an election commitment to reduce tax. Given what we've legislated for 2024, it means that we're going to see people, effectively, get a pay rise as that kicks in, because tax will be reduced from between 2½ per cent and 15 per cent for those earning between $45,000 and $200,000. That means more money in the bank for their own families. Whether you're single, whether you're double income with no kids as a couple, or whether you're a family with young children or you have teenagers—like me, with three sons aged 19, 17 and 15—this tax relief will help families make their home repayments, pay their energy bills and fill up their car. All this has happened under the Morrison government. We know that those opposite continue to want to raise taxes. You've just got to look at what they took to the last election. Don't believe that all those things have gone. Mark my words: they'll be bringing those things back.

What we're also seeing as we reduce tax is unemployment falling to 4.2 per cent—one of the lowest unemployment's rates in the nation's history. More people in jobs actually brings more tax into the Australian coffers, which means that we can invest in more suburbs like Bracken Ridge. In Bracken Ridge, we've recently upgraded Telegraph Road. We've installed night lighting for the Ridge Hills United Football Club, which is on the Bald Hills-Bracken Ridge border. We've just finished Hoyland Street; everyone in Bracken Ridge will know that it's gone from two lanes to four lanes, which is so important for that community down near the Brisbane City Council. We've upgraded Norris Road and Barbour Road; people will find that that small roundabout has now gone and that the signalised intersection is allowing traffic to flow. We've also done oval upgrades for St Joseph's, for the Parents and Friends Association. We've done funding for education and training at the Bracken Ridge Baptist Church, for new solar panels at the scout hall, and for the Bracken Ridge Kindergarten play space.

I could go on to talk about other suburbs, like Deception Bay, but I've run out of time. Know that the Australian government is behind you.

The time for the discussion has expired.

I move:

That business intervening before order of the day No. 5, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day.

Question agreed to.

Thank you, Deputy Speaker Vasta, for the opportunity to speak in favour of these appropriation bills before us in advance of the budget in 42 days time or thereabouts and maybe 88 days before the next election. I mention those numbers because there is a clearer picture emerging not just of the economy in the immediate aftermath of the worst of the pandemic—the very difficult summer that Australians have been asked by those opposite to endure—but of much of the last decade in terms of the economy and, particularly, the economic mismanagement of those opposite and their failure to manage the economy in the interests of ordinary working families. That clearer picture, which is emerging after almost a decade now of Liberal-National governance, is of an economy which had its share of challenges even before the pandemic—flatlining productivity, weak business investment, stagnant wages, job insecurity, flatlining living standards and substandard economic growth well below average. Then we entered the pandemic, and the difficulties of the pandemic turbocharged so many of those issues that ordinary working people were confronting in the economy that was being mismanaged so badly by those opposite.

Now, as we hopefully emerge from the worst of the pandemic, as many economists expect the economy to recover and hopefully recover not just strongly but sustainably and broadly, a recovery in the economy that works for everyone, it is an important time to take stock of the price ordinary Australians have been asked to pay for the mistakes made in pandemic management and economic management by those opposite and their failure to understand that you can't have a healthy economy or a healthy recovery without healthy people. That's why we've had these false dawns and false starts in the economy. It's why the Treasurer, three or four or five times now, has said the economy is about to come roaring back and, because of something those opposite have failed to do, that recovery has been cruelled. We don't want to see that happen again because so much is at stake, and Australians have already paid a hefty enough price for the mistakes made by those opposite.

As we try and recover strongly and sustainably, and broadly and inclusively, from the first recession in three decades and the false starts of the immediate aftermath of the recession, the budget has a really important role to play. That's why these appropriations bills are important things for this House to consider. I think the most important aspect of all that is to remember that the quantity of spending matters a great deal when it comes to the appropriation of taxpayer money—but so does the quality of the spending. One of the concerns we've raised repeatedly about a budget which has $1 trillion of debt—multiples of what those opposite inherited from Labor—is that that budget is absolutely riddled with rorts and absolutely chock-full of waste. This is the most wasteful government since Federation, with every rort and bit of waste signed off by the Treasurer, the member for Kooyong, and the cabinet that sits opposite. The quantity of spending matters, but the quality of spending matters as well, and this budget, which has a trillion dollars of debt, is full of rorts which have been signed off by the Treasurer.

Just today out of estimates, we heard more about the scandal that is the community safety program, with the absolutely shameless rorting of a program which is supposed to keep our community safe and, for example, ensure that people can practice their faith safely—but not just that. We heard about the shameless rorting and redirecting of that money, in the same way that we've seen with car park rorts, with sports rorts, with dodgy land deals and with the tens of billions of dollars wasted on JobKeeper for businesses that had rising revenue already. Right across the board, we see these shameful, shameless rorts from those opposite.

We saw more of that today with this community safety program. My absolutely outstanding colleague from Eden-Monaro asked the Prime Minister why the billions of dollars that he had committed to bushfire relief in her community and next door in the member for Gilmore's community hadn't been spent. Shamefully, out of $4.8 billion or something like that, not a single cent has been committed. So that is really the juxtaposition here. If there's an advantage to be gained in a marginal seat by rorting taxpayer funds, the money is sprayed around like you wouldn't believe. If people are living in caravans and struggling to recover from bushfires more than two years ago now then, once the cameras leave, the Prime Minister doesn't want to know about them. Once again, he's there when the cameras are there. He's there for the photo-op and the slick marketing and spin. He even made a fundraising video for the Liberal Party out of one of those visits with the military. But, as soon as the cameras leave, the Prime Minister is nowhere to be found. That speaks volumes about the priorities of those opposite when it comes to the budget. People are abandoned in their hour of need.

That's part of the reason why we had that stunning result in the Bega by-election at the state level. Those opposite want to pretend that there are no lessons to be learned from that. At a political level, that's fine by us, but nationally we need a Prime Minister who understands the hurt that people in those communities feel. They don't want to be abandoned by a prime minister who's always there for the marketing opportunity but not for Australians in their hour of need. That Bega by-election, the issues around bushfire relief and the fact that people are still living in caravans years after the event speak volumes about a prime minister who doesn't listen. He doesn't listen to the people of Bega on the weekend. He doesn't learn from his mistakes. He doesn't do his job. He's not there when people desperately need his help.

So this country needs a leader who shows up, takes responsibility and doesn't spend all of his time pretending that if something bad happens it's somebody else's fault and if something good happens it's somehow all his doing. That drives people wild, especially in communities doing it so tough, like the communities of the member for Eden-Monaro and the member for Gilmore. When he was asked about it, he engaged in a bizarre election advertisement for Andrew Constance—who is probably not really that keen to be stapled to the Prime Minister right now, but we'll leave that for him to deal with.

The country needs a prime minister who does his job. It needs a cabinet whose members don't leak and turn on each other—and we'll hear more about that in a few minutes time. It needs a treasurer who does his job rather than spending all of his time preening, spinning, self-promoting, gazing lovingly at himself in the mirror and auditioning for the leadership. We need a treasurer who does his job. We have a lightweight treasurer in a heavyweight role, and that is a big problem. That's why we see these big mistakes made when it comes to economic management by those opposite. It's why we've had these false starts in the recovery. It's why we've had tens of billions of dollars wasted by the most wasteful government since Federation. It's why there are all these rorts. It's why we have job insecurity, skills shortages and flatlining productivity. It's why we haven't had the business investment we need. It's why we've missed our opportunities on cleaner and cheaper energy. All of this stuff, in one way or another, goes back to the fact that the Treasurer of this country and the Prime Minister—to be fair to the Treasurer—both spend all of their time marketing and none of their time managing the economy in the interests of ordinary working families and communities like the ones that we represent on this side of the House.

Instead of doing his job, the Treasurer, we've learned, spends all of his time trawling through the rubbish bins of a share house that the Leader of the Opposition may or may not have lived in 31 years ago; trawling the Greens website, as he told us in question time yesterday; and poring over our transcripts with his little yellow highlighter. He spends all of his time worrying about what Labor says and what the press gallery upstairs are thinking about and none of his time worrying about how ordinary people are faring in real communities right around Australia. That is the issue.

After all of this, you'd think the very least he could do is organise a decent scare campaign. But today we had this extraordinary, humiliating spectacle: the whole scare campaign that the Treasurer has been trying to run against the Labor Party, for not even a fortnight now, has been torpedoed by the member for Mackellar, Mr Falinski, who appeared in a story today headlined 'Liberal MP backs inheritance tax rise'. He absolutely torpedoed the scare campaign the Treasurer is trying to run. There is only one major party figure in this parliament who is pushing for a death tax, and it's a Liberal member of this parliament. You can't make this stuff up.

You can imagine my glee this morning when I opened up the Financial Review to read that the Treasurer is being humiliated once again—that happens quite frequently. The nature of the humiliation is extremely satisfying. I cannot tell you how happy I was as I went for my little run around the lake this morning, in advance of jumping up on Radio National, to read that there is a major party person saying there should be a death tax—it's the member for Mackellar. You can imagine that his phone started ringing quite early as the Prime Minister and the Treasurer said, 'You're ruining our scare campaign.' So that was quite satisfying.

The butterfingers of Australian politics, the Treasurer of Australia, cannot even manage a half-decent scare campaign. No wonder he can't deal with the skyrocketing cost of living, declining real wages or $1 trillion of debt and a budget full of rorts. He can't even organise a scare campaign where the wheels don't fall off within barely a week and a half of starting it. What a humiliation for the butterfingers of Australian politics. His scare campaign has come crashing down around him in a humiliating—but, from our point of view, satisfying—fashion because it says it all about the shallowness of the lightweight Treasurer trying his best to appear to be doing a heavyweight job.

I think the people of Australia are working this government out. They are working the Prime Minister out. He never shows up, he never takes responsibility, he always blames others and he is always seeking to divide this country when it desperately needs unity, when it desperately needs to come together in the aftermath of the first recession in three decades. It needs to come together. We've got a divisive leader who wants to play politics on national security and the economy—these ridiculous, unhinged scare campaigns that we've seen from the dispatch box over the course of the last week in particular. The Australian people are working this Treasurer out and they're working this Prime Minister out. They know that the cabinet is at war with itself, they know that the Prime Minister is temperamentally incapable of leading and they know that the Treasurer is temperamentally incapable of understanding what life is like for real people in real communities.

But it is not only the Australian people who've worked the Treasurer out. The Financial Review has made a good contribution today on the Liberal plan for a death tax and, over a period of time now, has really given us a good sense of the Treasurer. I have some 'greatest hits' from Joe Aston at the Financial Review. Let's go to some of the things that have been written about the Treasurer in the last few months. Joe Aston writes:

It is actually quite confronting to watch the Treasurer of Australia so out of his depth.

He talks about a Treasurer 'whose powers of argument are extraordinarily underdone'. In a story titled 'Frydenberg fires JobKeeper missile at himself', he talks about how the Treasurer 'has completely missed the point, as he so often does'. He says:

Like the kind of buffoon once played by Leslie Neilsen, Josh Frydenberg has fired a heat-seeking missile at himself.

He talks about 'a bizarre and lame outburst' from the Treasurer. He talks about a Treasurer 'lighter than helium', a Treasurer 'who has misspent more public money than any elected official in the Commonwealth'. Another piece is titled 'Josh Frydenberg sustains full-body gravel rash'. He calls him 'the dolt from Kooyong'. He says:

Frydenberg's humiliation is total. His complete lack of political judgment has been exposed for all to see. He would be profoundly embarrassed, were he capable of embarrassment.

…   …   …

Even in defeat, the Treasurer was embarrassing himself. His was the press release of a student councillor …

He says:

Frydenberg can memorise artless debating points but his advocacy disintegrates when it collides with any policy complexity or requires any verifiable detail. Because he is lighter than helium.

He says:

He's been a cabinet minister for six years now, and deputy leader for three. Why does he still crave this lightweight celebrity nonsense?

Amen, Joe Aston! He continued:

We'll say it again. The Treasurer wishes to be taken as a person of substance yet seems incapable of behaving like one.

It goes on and on and on. It would entertain us to read all of it out, but we wouldn't have the time before the parliament needs to adjourn.

My point is this: there are lots of challenges in the economy and we need a heavyweight treasurer doing a heavyweight job. Instead, we've a guy who spends all of his time gazing at himself lovingly in the mirror, self-promoting, rehearsing his rubbish little scare campaigns which get torpedoed by the backbench, and all this sort of stuff. We need a treasurer who takes the challenges in our economy seriously. We need a prime minister who shows up and takes responsibility, like the member for Grayndler would if he were the Prime Minister. We've had almost 10 years of these characters. They've got a record of failure on the economy, and it's time that Australia turns that around. It will only turn that around with a new government.

Debate adjourned.

I declare that the following bills are referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration: Appropriation (No. 3) 2021-2022 and Appropriation (No. 4) 2021-2022.

This should be the workplace that sets the standard, but it has in no way been that workplace, and too many people, especially young women, have been harmed by that and by what has occurred here. It is now on all of us here to make the changes that have to happen. This shouldn't be the building where the rules that apply in every other workplace in the country don't apply. We are unique and special in this place because we make the rules. We make the rules that apply in all the workplaces. But we are not unique and special because we are above the rules, and that is absolutely what we must address and what this bill that we are talking about today goes some way towards doing.

It's around a year since Brittany Higgins first publicly told her story, and I need to begin this speech by acknowledging her bravery and all the other women, current and former staffers, who have told their stories and who contributed to the Set the standard report. Their contributions are immense, and I know for many of those people they were very difficult contributions to make, but they have been so important in getting us to the point we are right now. And it's not just staffers of course. It's not just women in politics and men in politics. People from across this building contributed—journalists from the press gallery, public servants, other staff who are all associated with this. They were really thorough and thoughtful contributions that should be part of making this a better place for everyone to work, and they obviously lead to a really thorough and thoughtful report from the Commissioner Kate Jenkins. I also want to thank her for giving us this report, which gives us a platform to make the changes that need to happen in this parliament to make it a safe workplace, especially for women.

This bill implements the recommendations 17 and 24 from Commissioner Kate Jenkins's review. Recommendation 17 is that the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act be amended to make it clear that the unfair dismissal provisions of the Fair Work Act apply to MOP(S) Act staff and that written notice of termination specifying the reasons for termination must be provided. Recommendation 17 also provides that it should be made clear that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to parliamentarians in their capacity as employers.

Recommendation 24 is that the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act should be amended to clarify that these laws apply to MOP(S) Act staff. Why is this important? Because we know from what's come in the report, from the discussions, from what people have put forward that too often staff in this building have felt afraid to come forward when they feel that they have been experiencing bullying, harassment or other unacceptable treatment. They're told of a pattern of these types of allegations being dealt with like they are political allegations, not like they are professional allegations made in a professional workplace. So these are important reforms that go some way to making the changes needed in that space.

We've also heard from staff that these particular issues contributed to a feeling of a lack of job security, and that meant there was a power imbalance, and there is a power imbalance between those of us who are employers in this place and those people who are employees. Hopefully, these measures will go some way to fixing that imbalance to provide an environment where staff do feel confident and safe to come forward in the way they need to, to ensure that we do have a safe and supportive workplace for everyone.

Of course, this bill is just one small step—and it is a small step—in the process of making sure that we implement this review and we do make this a workplace that is safe for all. We had the statement of acknowledgement last week from the presiding officers, from the Prime Minister and from the Leader of the Opposition, and that was also an important step. We have our cross-party independently chaired leadership task force to oversee the implementation of Commissioner Jenkins's recommendations, and we now have a joint standing committee on parliamentary standards to oversee standards and accountability in this place. So, again, some steps are being taken.

But what can't happen with this work is what happens to too many reviews and too many efforts to change this place—that we put it on a shelf and say: 'Job done! Good on us. We had a review and ticked some boxes. Let's move on.' This is a workplace that, across the country, people look to. If we cannot set the standard, if we cannot say to young women in this country that this is a place where they are safe to work, where they're not just in the room but they are heard in the room and are safe in the room, we are absolutely not doing our jobs. I'm very proud that Labor has a commitment to ensure that this is a safe workplace. We will prioritise our staff as part of this process. We will make sure that their voices continue to be heard. This is their workplace, and we have a duty to all of them.

Doing this work will take leadership and commitment from all of us, and I want to highlight some of the crucial areas of change that Kate Jenkins outlined in her report. There are two areas that I think particularly relate to our roles as MPs and employers in this place. I will quote from Kate Jenkins's speech here when she launched her report. The first area she called out is that we need is leadership. Our recommendations are focused on strengthening leadership to foster safe and respectful work environments. This includes both institutional leadership and individual leadership of parliamentarians, officeholders and party leaders. Leaders set the tone, and leadership at the top is particularly important to set clear expectations and role model safe and respectful behaviour.

I think if you asked many members of our community if that was the type of leadership they saw from this building at the moment, they might actually laugh in your face. We don't meet those standards at the moment. We have a lot of work to do to meet those standards, and that is on all of us in this place, because every single one of us can contribute to that—to showing the leadership that comes from the top but that comes from everyone in this building. It's going to be a crucial next step in getting the change we need.

The other area I want to highlight is needing to end the culture of entitlement and impunity that, for too long, has existed in this place. There do have to be consequences for poor behaviour. The report talks a lot and the debate around this has talked a lot about how this is a place that runs on power, and it absolutely does. But power shouldn't be unchecked, and power shouldn't mean that there aren't consequences when you don't do the right thing, when you cause harm to other people. So, again, I'm really pleased that this is something that Commissioner Jenkins picked up on in her report, and she made some very serious recommendations around how that power should be checked and how there should be accountability for behaviour in this place for employers. Again I will quote from her. She said:

The fourth is standards, reporting and accountability. We recommend establishing clear and consistent Codes of Conduct, alongside an independent complaint body, where it is safe to make a report, standards are enforced and people are held accountable through sanctions.

That is going to be so important if we are going to get change in this place.

I've been a staffer here and, like so many who have had that experience—and there are a number of us who are now elected who have had that experience—I came here because I believe in democracy and I believe in the power of the work that this place does. My experience as a staffer was positive, and that's one of the reasons why I find it so devastating to hear the experiences of so many other staffers who have been absolutely failed and let down by what's happened in this building. As an MP now, I rely on my staff and I know just how essential they are to keeping this place running. They deserve the respect of working in a professional and modern workplace, not a workplace that thinks the rules don't apply to it, that somehow we are in a magical category where we can do whatever we like and there are no consequences. So I'm also very pleased that, as part of the report, there is a lot that goes to support for us as employers so we can actually do our jobs better and support our staff better and have a safer workplace.

I want to briefly pay tribute, as part of this speech, to all the women who have gone before those of us first-term female MPs in this place and who have done much of the hard work of beginning to make this a workplace that women are welcomed in, even if we still have a long way to go before women are safe here. Susan Ryan introduced the Sex Discrimination Act, which became law in 1984 under the Hawke government. There are the female and male MPs—and we have one sitting down the front here—who made this an easier workplace for women like me who have had babies and young families while in office. Those are changes that have happened relatively recently. So it does show us that progress can be made. It does show us that we can change this place. It is on all of us to continue that change, to make sure that women are not just here but that they are supported to be here, that they are safe, heard and know that this is a workplace that they can fully participate in.

The women of Australia have been very clear over the past year: they will not sit back and let their voices be ignored anymore. Young women, in particular, have been very clear with me and, I know, with many others that their voices will not be ignored. It's a year since the March4Justice, and Australian women are still angry. They still don't believe that this place has met their demands. Doing the work to get this House in order, to get our workplace in order, is crucial to showing we can deliver.

I want to pick up where my good friend the member for Jagajaga left off in terms of women marching and women being angry and the voices of young women which are demanding to be heard just to make this observation. Not long after the March4Justice, I was sitting in a doctor's reception, waiting for an appointment. They always play something on the television for everyone when they are waiting. There was a documentary on about the women's marches and the feminist movement in the 1970s. They showed some of the meetings of the women planning their actions and planning their marches. One thing that really struck me was how excited and happy they were and how they were, it seemed watching the documentary, full of a sense that they were going to make change and that, whilst they were angry at—let's face it—centuries of women not being treated equally to men, they also seemed to be full of positivity and hope. As I said, they seemed to be enjoying themselves. Some of the meetings looked almost like a party. Then you fast forward to 2020 and 2021 and particularly the March4Justice, when, really, the aims of those women, you would think, would have been fulfilled by now. I think that the pervading emotions amongst the women who marched and the women who watched and supported the march were anger and disappointment that it was still happening and that, after all of those decades, in some circumstances it had got worse.

The other thing that happened with the March4Justice is that it was the voices of young women who, disturbingly and shamefully, had experienced sexual assault or harassment that were amplified. As the member for Jagajaga said, they demanded to be heard, and they demanded that without apology. They were inspiring. I think that in some ways that goes to the heart of one of the observations and recommendations of Kate Jenkins in her Set the standard report, about the need to end a culture of entitlement and impunity, because ultimately we know that sexual harassment, assault and violence, be it in families domestically, be it in the street or be it in the workplace—the private sphere or the public sphere—comes down to gender inequality and a belief in entitlement, impunity and superiority. For everything else that we can do, are doing and should do to make workplaces, homes, streets, sports clubs and theatres safe for women, fundamentally what we have to do is continue to work towards gender equality, and that goes for this parliament as well.

So this legislation is supported wholeheartedly and in a bipartisan manner because it is a step towards fixing the problems that clearly have existed in this workplace for far too long, and it's a welcome step, as was the acknowledgement and apology by the Presiding Officers, leaders of parties and Independents that happened earlier in this parliament. But it's not enough. Laws and words on their own don't lead to changes in culture. We've heard a lot of words from a lot of us about changing the culture and about a commitment to do so. Whilst this legislation and the words of apology and acknowledgement are a good start, they are not enough, alone or together, to change the pervading culture, particularly the pervading culture of entitlement and impunity that exists too much in politics, particularly—whilst I'm sure there are examples of women behaving badly—in the male dominated activities of politics and parliament.

Words and laws alone don't change the culture, but do you know what does? Actions change the culture. Demonstrated and lived attitudes change the culture. If we really want parliament to be the standard bearer for safe and respectful workplaces—and, if anyone doesn't, I ask why they're here—then the people who are here, who have been elected to be the leaders of this workplace, are absolutely responsible for setting that standard and demonstrating it in everything we do and in the way we interact with our staff, with the staff of other parliamentarians, with the people who work in this chamber, with those who clean our offices, with the secretariats of our committees, with those who serve us coffee and food in the canteens and at the coffee trolleys, and with those who work in the press gallery. We have to be responsible for setting the standard and demonstrating it in the way we interact with everyone, and we have to be responsible for setting the standard and demonstrating it in this parliament.

I'm pleased that there is a committee to establish a code of conduct for those of us who are elected to work here. My opinion is that that code of conduct needs to look at how we conduct ourselves in this parliament, particularly in the most watched part of this parliament, question time. You only have to look at the question time that we all had to sit through today to see examples of bullying and verbal abuse, of behaviour that is the antithesis of the behaviour that we should be modelling if we want to set the standard.

Too often, the behaviour engaged in politics in this chamber and outside of this chamber falls so far short of the ambitions of the Set the standard report and the legislation that we are all supporting today that it's not only depressing; it's just not surprising that so many Australians are lacking in trust and falling prey to the lies, the misinformation and the conspiracy theories of people who are taking advantage of that dissatisfaction with politics for their agendas and aggrandizement. How do we establish a workplace that abhors bullying, harassment and verbal abuse? It's up to us as the leaders of this workplace, but, in particular, the Prime Minister and the ministers in his cabinet, who displayed those very behaviours during all of their interactions, including in this parliament and in question time, need to change.

This legislation is welcomed, as is the legislation that I anticipate will follow, as we work to implement all of the recommendations of the Set the standard report, as the Labor caucus has unanimously committed to doing. While we're at it, we need to implement the Respect@Work recommendations. This workplace needs to be safe for everyone; every workplace needs to be safe for everyone. When we're given the tools to do it by the experts, we need to take those tools up and use them.

I want to finish my contribution by saying that these are the behaviours that I would like to see in a code of conduct, behaviours that talk about honesty, transparency, responsibility and respect. That's not too much to ask of our parliamentarians.

I want to join with others to say that we are nothing without our staff—those in our electorate offices, parliamentary offices and the staff that we don't employ but work in this building in the business that we're in. We are the face and the voice of the work that is done by people who are often young, enthusiastic, eager, smart and hopeful—people that we should be lifting up, not people that we should be crushing. We are responsible, no matter what the age of the people who work for us, for the way in which they are treated by us and by others.

I want to lend my support and admiration to the brave and tough young women who made the decision—and I can't imagine how hard it was to make—to speak publicly about their experiences that led to this Set the standard report being delivered after an investigation. To everyone who participated in that and had to relive, from the stories that we've seen in that report, horrendous behaviours in order to make it better for other people, that takes a strength and, I hope, a resilience that is hard for many of us to imagine. It also takes a selflessness that is more than admirable. Let us all here set the standard today, tomorrow, during the election campaign, when we're in government, when we're in opposition, when we're at the footy club or at the local play, and when we're in question time. If we don't set the standard and live up to that standard, how can we expect others to?

Today marks one year to the day since Lisa Wilkinson's interview with Brittany Higgins and Samantha Maiden's reporting. Samantha wrote today:

One year ago today, on the morning of February 15, @newscomauHQ published the first interview with Brittany Higgins. A lot of things have happened in intervening year. Good & bad. I remain proud of the work we did & grateful she chose to speak.

Fiat justitia ruat caelum

This, as I'm sure all honourable members know, is Latin for, 'Let justice be done, though the heavens fall.'

The #MeToo movement has reshaped the conversation over sexual harassment. The important contributions from Jess Hill, whose terrific book is titled See What You Made Me Do, Rosie Batty's time as Australian of the Year and the book Enough Is Enough by the member for Jagajaga, Kate Thwaites, and her predecessor, Jenny Macklin, have highlighted the importance of reducing the scourge of sexual harassment.

This is a simple matter of right and wrong, but, if you also need an economic argument to go along with it, it would be that sexual harassment is a huge drain on productivity. Australia faces a large gender pay gap which is closing at an extraordinarily glacial pace. That gender pay gap appears to be highest in professional occupations, and one reason for that, according to research by my former ANU colleague Deborah Cobb-Clark, now a professor at the University of Sydney, is the prevalence of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment often deters women from taking on jobs that involve long and irregular hours where they may be dealing with sexual harassment from co-workers or clients. Australia would not only be a more just country if we had less sexual harassment; we would be a richer and more productive nation as well.

As Jess Hill told me in a podcast that I do, The Good Life: 'The world has changed, and I went from a position where I didn't even know if I could use the word "patriarchy" in a book without coming across as some sort of, you know, radical man hater.' She said that changed because of the #MeToo movement. 'That changed because the world was ready for this change and was ready to start making invisible systems visible.'

That recognition of the challenge of sexual harassment is one that those of us on the Labor side saw in full throttle during the 2010-2013 parliamentary term, in which Australian's first female Prime Minister was subjected to an extraordinary level of gendered attacks from an opposition leader who called for an election so that, as he put it, she could 'make an honest Prime Minister of herself' and who stood in front of signs describing the Prime Minister in gendered terms. This sort of gendered attack was levelled at the person who held the highest office in the land and who is so often referred to in this place by her first name, rather than being accorded the respect that Australia's Prime Minister deserves.

We saw at that time that those extraordinary attacks flowed through to women's willingness to enter politics. Some were fired up by it, but some looked at it and thought that there were other occupations that they would choose instead and that that level of sexual harassment was not something that they would subject themselves to.

The issue of sexual harassment of parliamentary workplaces has arisen in other countries as well. In Britain, the allegations of sexual harassment in November 2017 led to the creation of a cross-party working group on an independent complaints and grievance policy. Dame Laura Cox's report was published in October 2018 and, ultimately, led to the establishment of an independent expert panel to consider cases against MPs in June 2020. Australia is running behind the United Kingdom in dealing with this issue.

I want to acknowledge the hard work of Kate Jenkins, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, in bringing down the important report Set the standard. As that report notes, parliament should not be the floor for workplace culture, but should set the standard. Just as the Commonwealth, when it goes into a court of law, is expected to behave as a model litigant, this place should be a model for other workplaces. Yet, it is very clear from the surveys that were done by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, that it is anything but.

Thirty-seven per cent of people working in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces had experienced some form of bullying, with one respondent saying, 'Frequently, like at least every week, the advice was to go cry in the toilet so that nobody can see you, because that's what it's like up there.' One in three people working in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces said they had experienced some form of sexual harassment. One spoke of aspiring male politicians who, in one case, thought nothing of 'picking you up, kissing you on the lips, lifting you up, touching you, pats on the bottom, comments about appearance—you know, the usual; the culture allowed it'.

Over half of all people currently working in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces had experienced at least one incident of bullying, sexual harassment or actual or attempted sexual assault. Among female parliamentarians, 63 per cent reported sexual harassment compared to 24 per cent of male parliamentarians. I note that the rate of sexual harassment experienced by female parliamentarians is higher than the national average for women, which is 39 per cent. Respondents spoke about the culture in which individuals responsible for misconduct are an 'open secret' that nobody does anything to address and in which it was known that the perpetrator couldn't lose their job and it was expected that they wouldn't face any sanctions.

The report made a number of recommendations, one of which was a statement of acknowledgement, which the Prime Minister and the Labor leader spoke to in this place last Wednesday. That was an important act. It would have been better had the government brought to hear that statement some of those who had been affected by the behaviour that led to the commissioning of the Jenkins report. That was done in the case of the National Apology to the Stolen Generations; it should have been done in this instance.

There is a cross-party working group which will explore the creation of an independent parliamentary standards commission, and I hope that that commission will have some of the character of the British complaints procedure which ensures that the complaints are dealt with outside the regular parliamentary processes. The review also suggests that there should be consistent and comprehensive alcohol policies across Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. The occasional drink probably isn't a problem. Drunkenness, though, we well know, in this place and in other places can be associated with misbehaviour.

The report also made clear that the number of women in senior positions is a core determinant of misconduct. I went to the Parliamentary Library's latest figures on the gender breakdown of parliamentarians across both houses. Currently, among Labor representatives, 48.9 per cent are female; among Liberal representatives, 26.7 per cent; and among National Party representatives, 28.6 per cent. So nearly half of Labor representatives are women, while in the coalition the figure is barely above a quarter. Across other parliaments, I note that in Western Australia, Tasmania and the ACT a majority of Labor representatives are women. Indeed, in Tasmania and the ACT, a majority of all representatives in the parliament are women. That must change the culture. It must make a difference.

I acknowledge a number of initiatives that have been important in helping to shape change. The Girls Takeover Parliament initiative recognises the value of having young women spend time in parliamentary offices. Last year in a parliamentary speech I quoted Sharmini Caldwell, who joined my office as part of that initiative. She said: 'It's not up to women alone. There is a responsibility on men to do better and to ensure that the men around them do better.'

The previous Labor speakers have highlighted the importance of reform of question time. I think we need to acknowledge that question time is a bizarre institution. Is there any other workplace in Australia where it would be considered acceptable to shout insults at your co-workers while they're trying to do their job? The nature of question time has become accepted in this place, but you need only speak to new members of parliament or to school groups who see it for the first time to recognise that it's pretty unusual. It's testosterone packed, it's noisy and it doesn't do us much credit in the broader environment. Many people see the behaviour in question time and say to themselves, 'Well, I wouldn't let my kids behave that way.' So reforming question time will help to raise the standard to which politicians are held in the broader community. Relatively few people watch question time in its entirety, but many people who watch the news will see a snippet of question time, and it's not normally a sober, calm, considered snippet; it's often the most overheated moment of the day. If they look at that and see behaviour that they wouldn't tolerate around their dinner table, I don't think that reflects well on us.

Trust in politicians is an issue for both sides, but it's particularly an issue for those of us who believe that government has a powerful role in addressing social problems—those of us who are proud of the creation of Medicare and the National Disability Insurance Scheme. For progressives, eroding trust in politicians erodes trust in government. The alternative to trust in government is that old Ronald Reagan approach, where he said: 'Government isn't the solution. Government is the problem.' The more people see that their politicians can't be trusted, the more likely they are to say that government can't be trusted, the more likely they are to turn to laissez-faire minimal-government approaches, and the less likely they are to back us in to create institutions like the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

I also want to commend to the House an initiative from Joanna Richards, who joined my office to produce A toolkit for gender advocacy. Joanna did that as part of her work completing her PhD at the University of Canberra, working with the 50/50 by 2030 Foundation located at the University of Canberra's Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis. She's put together a really useful toolkit aimed principally at those who are advocating on gender based issues. She tells the story of the 2006 RU486 debate and the way in which lobbyists for that change worked constructively with parliamentarians on all sides. Joanna's toolkit is based on a series of interviews with parliamentarians on all sides of the house and with experienced parliamentary staff. It's a valuable toolkit for anyone lobbying on gender based issues, but I'll be honest: it's pretty valuable for anyone lobbying MPs on any issue. She has a range of tips and tricks for engaging, how to make the most of short meetings, how to prepare briefing notes and how to engage to get long-term reform. It's available for free download on my website and, for anyone watching who would like a copy, I'm more than happy to send you a copy of that. Working with Joanna, Sharmini and so many other talented women, including my extraordinary staff, has made me a better member of parliament.

I rise in this chamber to support the bill before the House. The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 seeks to implement a number of the recommendations made by the Jenkins review and to improve the protections of staff within Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. Over the course of the past 12 months, in particular, many times we have heard horrific stories relating to experiences of staff, particularly young women, in this place. Each time a survivor has come forward to share their story, it has struck a chord with our country. It is clear that there is an immediate and overwhelming need for cultural reform and for decisive action in order to address these issues, which is why Labor has worked very constructively and in a bipartisan manner on this bill and statements. It's because it's so important for all of us.

Every workplace in this country should be safe and free from harassment and assault, and the federal parliament should be setting the standard with regard to workplace culture, protections and, of course, safety. The reality is that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces have failed to ensure safe environments and equitable treatment for staff. Not only are we failing to meet these basic standards of respect and workplace protection; we are lagging behind almost all other workplaces in the nation.

Many times when the Morrison government have addressed the issue of parliamentary culture publicly their attitudes have been somewhat disrespectful to those who have experienced harm in this place. There have been suggestions from some members of the coalition that some of these cultural issues within the parliament can be attributed to the inherently stressful nature of the work that we do here. It's as if long hours are a justification for this sort of harassment and assault. The justification is particularly offensive in the concept of current workplace conditions experienced by many across Australia. For example, healthcare workers and aged-care staff are on shifts for sometimes 12 hours or more. Paramedics run a 10-14 shift—that is, a 10-hour shift and a 14-hour shift. They are often understaffed, overworked and underpaid. But, every day, they do work that is just as stressful and just as taxing as the work that we do here. At least they have a positive outcome by generally saving people's lives.

As we complained about staying here until the early hours of the morning to pass legislation last week, there were thousands of healthcare workers across the country also awake, working in full PPE in difficult and stressful conditions to keep other Australians alive. These workers have not engaged in or sought to justify the kinds of acts that have been perpetrated in this building and that we heard about throughout the course of the Jenkins review. For it to be considered the stressors of this place justify this sort of abuse and harassment is really an insult to those who have experienced harm in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces and those who work in far more difficult and stressful conditions than we experience here.

The substance of the Jenkins review has been deeply troubling. It's something that I, like all members, reflected on very deeply. The negative culture that exists in some corners of this place affects all of us, perhaps none more so than young women. I'll talk about a primary staffer in my office, a 21-year-old woman named Maddie. She began working in my office early last year, during the period in which many issues which have prompted the Jenkins review and the current bill before the House came to light. So I sat down and had a chat with her and consulted with her on the process of writing this speech. I was relieved that she has always felt comfortable in her workplace and never felt uncomfortable within the parliament or in the workplace either. But despite that, through conversations with Maddie and other staffers, it became clear that, even for those women within parliamentary workplaces who cannot point to a specific experience of discomfort or harassment, there is a palpable sense of apprehension and almost fear. That apprehension is capable of creating a hostile workplace in itself.

Maddie said that working in parliament had been a dream since she was a young girl. As a 10-year-old, upon hearing that Julia Gillard had become Australia's first female Prime Minister, Maddie said she burst into tears in her year 5 class. She was upset because she had wanted to be Australia's first female Prime Minister. She's got plenty of time and a good chance ahead of her; keep an eye on her! Working in parliament and as a staffer had been her dream for a long time. In early 2021 she was offered her first job as a parliamentary staffer, at the height of the media attention spotlight cast upon the conditions that exist for women within this building. She said she had an element of hesitancy about taking the job.

The seemingly endless series of stories relating to staffing culture and inadequate conditions for women creates a barrier to women's engagement in politics. Many women, rightly so, are apprehensive about engaging in politics for fear of the exact mistreatment that has existed for so many decades in this place. As a result, many have decided not to engage and seek careers elsewhere. Australian politics misses out on valuable intellect and insight, and men continue to be overrepresented, facilitating this whole ongoing cycle of harassment and fear.

Maddie fortunately decided to accept the job, and I am grateful for that because she is fantastic—she wrote that bit herself, by the way; I'll just put that in! She said she believes the only way a broken system can change is by people confronting it and working from the inside out to reform it. She said if she turned down the job she had been working towards her whole life because she was afraid, it would mean those perpetrating the fear had won. I commend her on her courage and many other women like her for their courage. But the reality is that she should never have been put in that position to begin with.

This bill is the legacy of women who overcame fear in order to change a broken system. They did so by sharing their stories, participating in reviews and calling out unacceptable behaviour—and sometimes just by turning up to work. In order to ensure that women have the opportunity to engage in politics as staffers, as journalists, as MPs and as senators, in order to ensure we honour the courage of these women who share their experiences, we must make sure we are doing more than just virtue signalling. It must be the first of many steps we take on a path to make real and meaningful change. The onus is on all of us in this place, especially as MPs, to change the system and to ensure that nobody feels fear to engage in the work that is done in this place.

The barriers to engagement for young women in politics have existed for some time. The recent media attention which has been thrust upon them should not be construed as an indication that these issues are only now surfacing, because, in truth, as we know from the Jenkins review, these issues have existed for a long time, and the attitude of this government towards women and female staffers has been present for some time. I want to think about a point that really got to me in 2018. Cast your minds back to two weeks after former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull called for cultural change in the way women are treated in this parliament, when the current Attorney-General who was then the Minister for Jobs and Innovation used the privilege of coward's castle during a Senate estimates hearing to make threats to publicly name Labor female staffers. This was disgraceful—a sexist tirade that was predicated upon the innuendo that young female staffers were engaged in affairs. The implications made by the now Attorney-General were baseless lies and deeply offensive to the women working in this building. This was done to serve her own political purposes. The now Attorney-General explicitly threatened these young women and made public allegations without any proof or any rationale for her comments. This is one of the examples that we see of the government responding inappropriately and offensively to issues in workplace culture.

These sexist attitudes have been pervasive since their inception, and have become even clearer over the last 12 months as discussions of parliamentary culture and workplace protections have played a central role in national policy. Disrespecting women by engaging in unsubstantiated inappropriate gossip regarding their personal lives is one of the many factors which contribute to broader harassment and violence against women. The appalling attitude towards women has been present for some time. Little has been done to address the gaping cultural issues within the government over the past few years. Last year, in the wake of the allegations made regarding the unsafe culture within Parliament House and the stories of women who came forward and shared their experiences of physical and mental violence, thousands of Australian men and women marched on Parliament House. They protested peacefully, demanding accountability and demanding justice. And what was the response? The Prime Minister responded by saying they were lucky not to have been met with bullets. This disrespect has been the hallmark of the latest incarnation of this government. There has been an appalling lack of leadership by those responsible for championing cultural change and the rights of survivors. Engaging in politics and our democracy is the birthright of all of us, but when people are afraid to engage in it, it means that we as a collective have failed. Nobody deserves to feel unsafe in their workplace, and we should do all that we can to stop that.

The implementations of the Jenkins review are crucial to ensuring that we head down a new road. Legislation enables us to chart a path to a new and better future, but it's also critical to remember that we are just at the beginning of that path. The work does not end with this bill; in fact, I think it's the point where we sit down and say, 'This is where the real work begins.'

It's crucial for us as MPs to understand our own roles and our power in this place. It's not just the absence of abusive or harassing behaviour, but it's about each of us making an active effort to create positive environments. Culture change is not just about the absence of harm, it's about the creation of good. It's about us devoting ourselves to addressing the issues that have plagued this place. As MPs with power in this place we must be ready and eager to reflect upon our own behaviour. We must be willing to acknowledge instances where we have failed or not lived up to the best of what this place represents. There's no excuse for justifying the horrible things that staff in this building have been forced to endure. Every day we fail to proactively address these issues is a day where we enable the status quo to continue.

This is one of the joys of being a member of a party that is full of incredibly brave, strong and intelligent women. I think that we've been very lucky with the quality of people that we've have had around us. Being in parliament with the likes of Julia Gillard, Jenny Macklin and Tanya Plibersek, to name a few—and, of course, Amanda Rishworth, who is at the table now—I feel that I've been extremely lucky to have worked with these people for a long time and to have a really good grounding in and understanding of the things that matter. What matters is the way that we see the new generation of our people coming in, like the member for Lilley, as an example—that's going to cost you five bucks, Anika! From the progressive side of politics, we've been able to work to address these situations and, really, nip things in the bud before they get out of hand. And that's because we've got strong, talented women in our party that can lead on any given level, on any given topic and on any given policy. That's something that we should be proud of and something that I think Australians will benefit from when we see these people sitting on the other side of the parliament.

There has been no shortage of times throughout the past year when I've been concerned with the government's attitude towards those who have come forward and shared their stories. We must do more than just hope for change. We must work for it. It's my hope that this bill marks the first of many steps we will take to create a better, safer future for those in this building and to become a shining example for those across the country. Now is the time that we put a stake in the ground and say: enough is enough.

The parliament has resolved to establish the Joint Standing Committee on Parliamentary Standards to oversee standards and accountability. These standards are so important that our Labor caucus, which is at the forefront of these things, is committed to working towards implementing all the recommendations from the Set the standard report and to consulting with our parliamentary and electorate staff, unions and workplace representatives as we work towards the implementation. Our staff are our priority in this process. It is their workplace, and they deserve nothing less than a safe, supported work environment. Our long-held view in Labor includes a commitment to ensure our parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful for everyone and a commitment to gender equality, including the need to promote and support women's leadership in the parliament. We know there's a lot to be done, but the thing with Labor is that we know that an Albanese government is committed to working with all parties to ensure the safety of everyone that works here.

I thank the member for McEwen and, more particularly, Maddie, for their contributions to this debate. Maddie would, clearly, make an excellent member for McEwen—some might say the sooner the better!

Opposition members interjecting—

Oh, really? Maddie Renshaw.

I also support the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. It implements much-needed reform that is well overdue in this building, but it is just one step in the process of making Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces safer by implementing some of the recommendations from the Jenkins review. It's just one step, and we have many more to go.

It's not just about us here, as important as this place is—the MPs, the staff, the workers in this place; it's really about every woman in every workplace around Australia. Our job here will not really be done until we can say there are structures in place to ensure that every woman is safe in the workplaces around the country, including ours, and in homes and even in schools. Our job will not be done until there is equality in every place and until women have the same opportunity to achieve whatever they want as any man. I don't think we can say that job will be done until we can say that.

There has been a lot of commentary and analysis about the toxic culture in Canberra—that bad behaviour has contributed to the bad culture of this place. But what people rarely ask is: What contributes to this culture? What are the contributing factors to this culture? We know that culture is determined by the behaviours and structures that are in place. While there has been bad behaviour that has occurred in this place; there has also been a lack of structure that has let people down. It's remarkable to me that in a building which 5,000 or so people descend on for weeks at a time, which involves long, late working hours, where there's a mix of power, a power imbalance and a lack of accountability, in the place where the actual laws of the land are made, the Commonwealth parliament, there's an absence of legal mechanisms, of HR structures, to deal directly with harassment, bullying and assault allegations.

Instead there are some 227 MP and senator offices that are effectively little fiefdoms, and each office deals with the transgressions, the assaults, the harassment and the allegations. Effectively there's a monarchy in each and every office. That is bad structure, and bad culture emanates from that. When you have a situation or an issue in an MP's or senator's office where there may be an allegation of harassment between staff members, how can the MP or the senator be the one to fairly adjudicate on that? Every workplace that I worked at before I entered parliament had an arms-length HR department or legal department and proper mechanisms to deal with those issues. That's been lacking here, and that's what I mean by the absence of culture.

We've also talked about behaviour and role modelling. As the previous speaker, the member for McEwen pointed out, we have in our party—we're not perfect—women in positions of leadership. That actually matters. They are role models that set a standard of behaviour. It also educates and informs our understanding of how we should be dealing with each other. That is something that, as the member for McEwen pointed out, has been of exceptional importance for the Labor Party in setting our standards to improve. Our caucus is almost 50 per cent women, and there are women in positions of leadership. That's not true often of many workplaces around the country, although it is somewhat better in the Public Service. I remember working in the Public Service, and most of my supervisors were women. For me it was basically understanding that, regardless of one's gender, it was about their merit, their hard work and so on. That was an important lesson for me through the workplaces that I experienced.

But, after a year or more of talking about these issues, not much has changed in some respects, as far as the actual structures that are or aren't in place are concerned. I would hope that the behaviours have changed and improved over that time as well. Just last week we sat in this place until 5 am, had a few hours break and then came back for another day of work. There are not many workplaces around Australia that would expect this of their workers. To be clear, I know that I'm here to do a job: to represent the people of Wills. Most of my colleagues here are the same: they understand that we're signing up for a job and that it's not a nine-to-five job. We understand that. The point is, though, that the MPs, the staff and the journalists—all the people in this building who regularly work very odd and long hours—do so in a high-pressure environment with high stakes. You can see that that is one of the reasons the Jenkins review found working at this parliament to be unsafe. It's a contributing factor.

The Kate Jenkins report also found that one in three parliamentary workers have faced sexual harassment and, out of those people, 84 per cent did not seek support or advice. That's a startlingly high number. To me, it shows that the lack of structure and the lack of mechanisms in place have meant that people have not been able to seek support or advice with respect to the harassment that they may have experienced.

Many people ask why this is. As I said, we know why: when people in this place do the wrong thing, there's not really a structure or even a culture to deal with the problem, at least effectively. As I said, it's sometimes left up to the MP or senator to determine this in their own office. There's no independent arbiter for allegations of harassment, bullying and assault. There is no arms-length process in the workplace, in a sense. There is no HR department or legal mechanisms in that respect. I think this structural deficit enables bad behaviour. People behave badly, but the structure, or the lack of it, also enables that bad behaviour and the overall culture.

But changing that culture is more than just talking about it, and that's what parts of this bill are fundamentally about. We have to match our rhetoric and our need for change with action. So we need to change those structures and set the standards that people can abide by. When we get this right—and I hope we will and I'm confident that we can—it can contribute and set an example for better behaviour, and that then becomes the norm. It becomes accepted, as I have experienced in other workplaces, as I mentioned. I think every woman in this building deserves that, at the very least.

The bill implements recommendations 17 and 24 from the Jenkins review. We know that recommendation 17 is that the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 be amended to make clear that the unfair dismissal provisions of the Fair Work Act apply to MOP(S) Act staff and that a written notice of termination specifying the reasons for termination must be provided. Recommendation 17 also provides that it should be made clear that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to parliamentarians in their capacity as employers. Recommendation 24 is that the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act be amended to clarify that those laws apply to MOP(S) Act staff. We know that the lack of job security for parliamentarians' staff is a major barrier to staff raising complaints. That's been quite clear in the review and the inquiry. The lack of job security results in power imbalance, which makes it easier—if that's the right word—for bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault to occur and harder for complainants to speak up, because they don't have the support network to allow them to raise those issues. Legislating these two recommendations of the Jenkins review will help provide greater job security for staff and highlight to parliamentarians their obligations as employers. It's a positive step. The parliament has also decided to establish a joint standing committee on parliamentary standards to oversee standards and accountability in this place, which I warmly welcome.

But these are only the first steps in making sure our workplaces—this workplace particularly—are safe and inclusive. The Labor Party have committed to working towards implementing all recommendations in the Set the standard report, and we will consult with our parliamentary and electorate staff, the relevant unions and workplace representatives to do this. Our staff are the priority in this process. This is their workplace. And, like all Australians, they deserve to feel safe and supported in their work environment.

Labor have a long-held commitment to ensure our parliamentary workplace is a safe and respectful place for everyone. We are committed to gender equality and promoting and supporting women's leadership in the parliament, but it is certainly true that there is still much work to be done.

Everyone has a right to go to work, and to feel safe while there. We are so lucky to work in this, the people's house—to serve the Australian people, to represent them. It is an honour and a privilege. So to know that for some individuals it has been a place of trauma is not just greatly concerning, it is a travesty and a failure. It is up to all of us to change the culture of this place. It is something I have spoken about before. It is not enough to create new bureaucratic structures. While a necessary precondition, and very much supported, it is not sufficient. We also need to ensure the culture of this place changes for the better. There is no doubt there have been horrible things happen in this place to staff and to elected representatives. These individuals should be listened to and believed. These individuals deserve action. Future parliamentarians and staff need action too. The ongoing health of our democracy requires such action.

Two young women, Ms Higgins and Ms Tame, bravely stood at the National Press Club last week to not only share their stories but fight for positive change. They deserve to be heard and they deserve to see the change they so fearlessly advocate for—not just for them, of course, but for all of those impacted, and for those who might otherwise be affected in the future. The issues raised in the Jenkins reviews, and the issues raised by Ms Higgins and Ms Tame, are not just 'women's issues'. They are societal issues and cultural issues that affect all Australians no matter their gender, sexual orientation, race, creed or political persuasion. This is a people issue, and it's up to each and every one of us in this place to take action.

To date, the discussions here have focused on the establishment of inquiries and independent structures. Last year, Labor committed to act on the deeply concerning findings of the Jenkins review. Labor will work to implement all 28 recommendations that came from that review. Labor are working to improve the culture of parliamentary workplaces and, in doing so, we are consulting closely with our staff on how best to do this. As a party, we have adopted a new code of conduct, complaints handling process, bullying and harassment policy and sexual harassment policy. Our staff are truly our priority in this process. This is their workplace, and they deserve nothing less than a safe and supportive work environment.

The fundamental issue here is the need for cultural change. If you're a staffer with political ambition, or even career ambition, you don't want to be seen to be the one rocking the boat. You don't want to do anything that will reflect badly on your boss, on your party. You don't want to let down the team. Our political culture mitigates against encouraging staff or MPs to come forward, to take action against perpetrators and to stand up and say some behaviour is, frankly, unacceptable. We need to ensure that staff who come forward with concerns will not be exiled or silenced; rather they will be believed and supported.

It is time survivors of harassment or assault of any kind are assured the powers that be are on their side. It is time that politicians of all persuasions, and the public, see transparency and action against inappropriate and unlawful behaviour as the greater political benefit rather than it being seen as preferable to cover it up. Our staff are already willing to put their careers on the line every three years when we, not them, encounter an election. It is only fair, therefore, that it is clear that fair work protections against unfair dismissal protect them too. Similarly, the least we can do is make clear that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to parliamentarians as employers as well.

MPs and their staff come from all different backgrounds. It's something we celebrate in our increasingly diverse parliament. Some have directly managed staff in their past careers, some have run small businesses or large businesses, and others have been part of organisations with large human resources departments. Some MPs come to this place with no prior training on how to manage staff. To date, there is no requirement to do so. The recommendation to ensure that parliamentarians are bound by the Work Health and Safety Act is so important because it will make sure ignorance is no longer an excuse. Legislating these two recommendations of the Jenkins review will help provide greater job security for staff and highlight to parliamentarians their obligations as employers. Legislating these two recommendations will bring the parliament in line with the Fair Work Act, the Work Health and Safety Act, the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. Not only is that something that, frankly, should have happened long ago but most people were, no doubt, dumbfounded to discover that they didn't already apply.

These are just the first steps in making sure our workplaces are safe and inclusive. Labor has a long-held commitment to making sure our parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful for everyone. We are committed to gender equality, including the need to promote and support women's leadership in the parliament by parliamentarians and staff. I'm proud to be part of a caucus with almost 50 per cent women, and I'm proud that, after the next federal election, amazing Western Australian women like Labor candidates Tania Lawrence in Hasluck, Zaneta Mascarenhas in Swan and Tracey Roberts in Pearce will join us in this place, ensuring the next government of Australia is truly representative. It's women like Tania, Zaneta and Tracey who will also bring valuable life experience and insight to this place. It's through the promotion of strong women like them and like my WA colleagues the member for Brand, the member for Cowan, Senator Pratt and Senator Lines that we will ensure this parliament becomes better.

As I said, this is not a women's issue; it's a cultural issue. It's a people issue, and it's incumbent on all of us to fix it. There is still so much work to be done. It is important that we recognise that we should not be placing the burden of solving these problems and fixing this culture on the victims. It is incumbent on everyone here to make sure that there is actual real cultural change and that that must happen not by talking or taking unilateral action but by listening to those affected, those who have been abused and those who are in fear and making sure that their concerns are actually addressed. Labor will work with all parties to ensure the safety of everyone who works in this place. We'll ensure that our staff have the same rights as all Australians and that their workplace becomes the example to all Australian workplaces that it should be. I commend the bill to the House.

Like many Australians, I've been disappointed, saddened and, at times, angered to hear allegations of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault in this place. I'm shocked that, according to the Jenkins report, over half of all people currently in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces have reported at least one instance of bullying, sexual harassment or actual or attempted sexual assault in their workplace. I'm heartened, however, that some of the commission's recommendations are already bearing fruit here today.

I have felt keenly the need to make improvements to ensure that every Commonwealth parliamentary office, both here in the parliament and in our electorate offices, are safe and respectful places for every employee and to make sure that the parliament really does set the standard for workplace culture, not the floor. While her matter is before the courts, Ms Brittany Higgins's act of sharing her allegations, I believe, has catalysed much-needed change, and I thank Ms Higgins for her bravery and I thank every person who made one of the 1,700 individual contributions to Commissioner Jenkins's review. Each of you has courageously shared your experiences, contributing to what I hope will be a true and meaningful change.

I am proud to have worked with fellow crossbench members in crafting a letter signed by the whole of the then crossbench urging the government to launch an independent review into the workplaces of parliamentarians and their staff. The establishment of this review on 5 March last year was a vital step on the path to the bill we debate today. Last year the parliament also passed the Archives and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021. This bill has made changes to ensure confidence of submissions to the independent review could be maintained to encourage those who have experienced harassment or abuse to come forward and share their stories. Again, the crossbench played an important role in this.

This bill bears valuable fruit from the Set the standard report tabled on 30 November 2021, implementing recommendations 17 and 24 to require a higher and a safe standard of behaviour in parliamentary workplaces. I support amendments to the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 that strengthen and clarify the employment rights of employees under the act, remove doubt that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to those employees and require that parliamentarians provide written reasons where they dismiss an employee from employment. I support the amendment to the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 that clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for the purposes of that act and I support the amendment of the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to put beyond doubt that employees under the MOP(S) Act, as we all know it, are protected from both age and disability discrimination in their employment and engagement.

The introduction of this legislation, the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022, is a great first step of the many that are needed. Other important steps, such as the outcome of the current review of the MOP(S) Act, are eagerly awaited. I commend this bill to the House and urge that focus and action on these reforms continue, even as we head into an election. Hearing a broad cross-section of members speak today, I believe that this is an issue on which we can grasp the opportunity provided by strong bipartisan support to achieve more meaningful change.

I rise to speak on the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. This is a bill that seeks to strengthen the rights of and protections for employees in parliamentary workplaces and, with that stated aim, I support the bill before us. This legislation will implement recommendations 17 and 24 of the Set the standard report of the independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces carried out by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Ms Kate Jenkins, and provided to the Australian government on 30 November 2021.

As a member of the task force charged with implementing the 28 recommendations of this vital review, I strongly support this bill and again reiterate my commitment to ensuring that all 28 recommendations of the review be implemented in full. Just a week ago we gathered in this very chamber to see the first recommendation of that review delivered through the reading of the joint statement of acknowledgement by the Speaker and the President of the Senate. It was a powerful moment for this parliament but, more importantly, for the survivor advocates who joined us in the chamber that day.

I would like to apologise to all of those who would also have liked to have been here to see that apology and hear that apology in person—in particular, Dhanya Mani and others who raised their concerns for some time in previous years and have not felt heard or have not felt that their concerns were properly acted upon. Whilst it's incredibly important that we have now acted upon complaints and better heard the accounts, it is important that we continue to work at having a better process to hear and engage with staff that have had issues. We also have to make sure that we are fully representing all people who have had those experiences. Having spent time with the women that were able to attend here last week afterwards, I know that was a very challenging experience for them to be here that day, but it was also an important step that they did not want to miss, so I am incredibly sorry to all those that were not given that opportunity.

The commission had recommended that 'leaders within the parliament deliver' that 'statement of acknowledgement' to publicly acknowledge the 'experiences of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault in CPWs; the impact of the misconduct on individuals; and the lack of action taken in the past'. Vitally, the delivery of that statement demonstrated a 'commitment to change, with shared accountability for progress'.

In her report, Commissioner Jenkins spelled out the importance of why a public statement from this parliament was required as:

An acknowledgement of the impact of misconduct is important for validating the experience of individuals who have been subject to harm under the watch of leaders in CPWs—

Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces—

Further, an acknowledgement can start to restore the trust between individuals who have experienced misconduct … It would be an important demonstration by leaders in these workplaces that they acknowledge the experiences, recent and past, and are committed to working together to ensure—

these workplaces—

are safe and respectful.

It's for this reason that this bill is similarly important. By implementing two more of those important recommendations of the Jenkins review, we're demonstrating in this place a collective 'commitment to change'. This bill before us now will implement recommendations 17 and 24, essentially putting beyond doubt that employees of members of parliament and senators are protected by the provisions of the Fair Work Act, the Work Health and Safety Act, the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. This should be a given. This shouldn't have to be spelt out, but the sad reality is that it does have to be because of past practices in this place.

There's no denying that this is an incredibly rewarding workplace but also an unbelievably challenging one. For the staff that sign up, they deal with some of the most emotional and confronting workloads, whether it's working with our community, assisting people with NDIS or aged-care packages, helping separated families, taking very distressing phone calls or working here in parliament with tight deadlines, fierce debate, intense negotiations and long hours. It's already such an intense workplace any hint of harassment, bullying or sexual assault would only compound existing trauma.

It's up to all of us to change the culture in this place. We don't need to wait for legislation or codes of conduct; we can each play our part, but this bill is a good first step. This bill amends the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984, the MOP(S) Act, to provide that reasons for termination of employment must be given in writing and to clarify that the existing legislative requirements apply to the termination of employments over the MOP(S) Act employees. It also amends the Work Health and Safety Act to clarify the duties parliamentarians owe under that act to their employee. Finally, it also amends the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act to clarify that these laws apply to staff employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act as per recommendation 24 of the Jenkins report.

In summary, this bill seeks to put beyond doubt the employees of members of parliament and senators are protected by the provisions of the Fair Work Act, the Work Health and Safety Act, the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. By providing these assurances I hope it will contribute to our overall goal of creating safe and respectful workplaces for our staff.

It's important to note that recommendation 17 came about because there were strong misconceptions about the right of parliamentarians to dismiss their employees under current arrangements. It was a recurring theme throughout the Jenkins inquiry—people held back from making complaints out of a genuine fear and a sense of job insecurity, the perception being that a parliamentarian could hire and fire staff at their own whim. A participant noted:

The ability of an MP to terminate a staff member without due grounds should be significantly reined in, as I believe the fear of being sacked is fundamentally what prevents staff from reporting workplace bullying and harassment.

Even the Department of Finance, the very department that has oversight of the employment of parliamentary staff, conceded this point in their submissions to the Jenkins inquiry. So, if the very department in charge of employment concedes there is a misconception here, it's only appropriate that the issue be clarified, and that's what we seek to do in this legislation.

We also need to use this opportunity to send a message to all MOP(S) Act employees that they have protection. They cannot be fired at the whim of an MP or senator. That misconception has helped perpetrate the culture of bullying, harassment, secrecy and cover-up. That must stop now. Please know your rights, your rights that are being strengthened as a result of this legislation.

I also want to refer to the replacement explanatory memorandum that has been provided and tabled in the House today, because it has an important change to the document that was originally tabled. The new replacement memorandum has an additional line regarding a notice of termination. To reflect the strengthening of employees' rights, the document now states that such a notice would need to provide in detail the reasons for termination. It's an important addition. No longer can it be a vague, tick-a-box exercise. A detailed reason for termination must be given. I think it's important that the government has acknowledged this and included it in the explanatory memorandum.

The other component of this bill today is to ensure protections against age and disability discrimination. The recommendation was to amend the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act to clarify that the laws apply to staff and consultants employed or engaged under the MOP(S) Act. It's important that the full suite of antidiscrimination laws contribute to the safe and respectful workplace we are trying to create through implementing the Jenkins report. It's important, again, to make it abundantly clear that employees in parliamentary workplaces are covered and protected under these acts.

Some participants in the review who identified as a person with a disability spoke about how they were excluded in the workplace or were viewed by managers and colleagues only through the lens of their disability. They felt excluded from decision-making roles and felt that they were treated differently to able-bodied colleagues. As a side note, the commission also recorded that participants noted the general lack of accessibility of Parliament House, particularly for people with mobility issues. They felt that this building not only excluded people with disability from physically accessing the building and its spaces but also sends a message about who belongs and is entitled to work in these workplaces.

This is something that I highlighted these with the Speaker in December 2019 when I invited a group of guests to come to Parliament House to witness the handing over of a petition highlighting inequity and treatment of people over 65 in accessing the NDIS. I was horrified and incredibly embarrassed that they described to me the difficulty of gaining entry through security, accessing public viewing galleries and even using so-called accessible toilets. I wrote to the Speaker at the time and was assured that these considerations would be incorporated in a future review and audit of Parliament House. I think this needs to be dealt with as a matter of urgency. This is the people's house, and we cannot have a situation where some people are excluded because of their disability.

I would like to refer to some of the comments made in the other place about this legislation. In introducing the bill, the assistant minister, Senator Duniam, said:

The bill would progress important and significant reforms to help ensure that Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces are workplaces where expected standards of behaviour are modelled, championed and enforced …

It's a lofty ambition, and I hope we can live up to it. It's a promising sentiment. Minister Birmingham said in his speech:

For the recommendations that are solely within the government's responsibility and control, our intention is they be implemented within the recommended time frames. Thus far, that is on track for all of those recommendations. We are conscious that the recommendations are complex, but they are also important, especially those such as establishing the office of parliamentary standards and culture.

Again, that's a promising and welcomed sentiment, but we must first make sure that we do this. We need actions rather than words.

Senator Waters, in the other place, a fellow member of the implementation task force, pointed out that this bill alone will not change the culture of shaming and silencing that stopped staff coming forward. She, in fact, detailed the experiences of Dhanya Mani, another brave former staff member who has been so poorly treated and has fought against the system to ensure her voice and the voice of others can be heard. This is an important step. We need to make sure that all the recommendations are implemented. We need to take note that the Jenkins review, which was rendered in relation to all workplaces, included the introduction of a positive duty on employers in this workplace and all workplaces to ensure that staff are safe, to ensure that it's not just all words but also real action.

Positive duties put an obligation on employers to protect their staff from sexual harassment in the workplace. It is the most important cultural change to help seriously address sexual harassment in our workplaces. It needs to happen. It's disappointing that the government simply has not tackled that in this term of parliament. A positive duty in parliamentary workplaces was one of the most prominent recommendations of the Respect@Workreport. It had the support of a vast array of groups, from the Business Council of Australia to the ACTU, from the Law Council to the Human Rights Commission. Yet that report and those recommendations have sat untouched. We simply cannot allow that to happen to the Set the standard report.

I welcome the government's commitment to implementing the recommendations. I repeat my call that we implement all the recommendations of the previous Jenkins report in relation to Australian workplaces and respect in Australian workplaces. I welcome the commitment to implementing the recommendations. But I have to note that it was only 24 hours after we delivered that statement to the House that we saw this parliament, this chamber, sit until 5 am. I note the Speaker's comments in relation to that being the standard practice and the convention of how that operated. But it showed that dissonance that, while we are here talking about changing culture, only 24 hours after implementing that change we were already acting contrary in this place to the very recommendations.

We have to change the way this is done. It starts with everyone in this place. The government is in a position to do so. It is important to note that, at the end of the day, it is conduct and behaviour that will judge how serious the desire is to change the culture in this place and ensure it is the gold standard workplace that it should be. This should be the gold standard of workplaces in Australia. We have a long way to go, but I welcome today's first step.

I rise to share some brief reflections on Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022, which has my support and commendation. This bill is a first step in the implementation of all recommendations of the Jenkins review into parliamentary workplace culture filed last November.

Specifically, this bill improves the existing provisions of the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 to ensure it's crystal clear that the unfair dismissal, antidiscrimination and workplace health and safety laws that apply to all other workplaces in this nation apply hereto in this parliament. That should not be a novel concept. This parliament should be a model workplace that operates on principles of decency, respect and integrity. Our democracy is worse for it if not. The government has taken the first step, but we have only just begun the work needed to improve the culture in this place. Apologies lose their meaning without action and results. The brave and impressive Grace Tame and Brittany Higgins reminded us of that just last week.

I welcome this bill, the statement of acknowledgement last week and the establishment of an implementation task force to action the rest of the Jenkins review recommendations. But I will not stop fighting until each one is implemented in full. I want to note in particular recommendations 21 and 22, which call on this parliament to establish a code of conduct for all MPs and their staff, and an independent parliamentary standards commissioner to enforce the code of conduct. The review specifically recommended that the commissioner be empowered to investigate and make findings of fact about alleged breaches of the code of conduct and recommend sanctions of our political leadership or we, as a parliament, can impose to resolve a breach.

In November 2020, I introduced the Commonwealth Parliamentary Standards Bill to this House, which has many of the same features as this recommendation. I was pleased to share detailed information with the Jenkins review about that proposal, and I implore the government and all other leaders in this place to do the work to ensure this parliamentary standards commissioner comes to fruition. No-one—be it a parliamentarian, a staffer, a journalist, a public servant or a contract worker—in this building should be left with nowhere to go if they experience misconduct. Our position as elected officials should never trump the safety of people who come to work in this place. From hospitals to university departments—I've worked in many, many workplaces in my career where robust codes of conduct offset the risk of power imbalances between colleagues and toxic and harmful work environments forming. This workplace should be no exception.

I thank Commissioner Jenkins for her work to ensure this bill has found passage through this place, and I thank everyone who contributed to the work that formed that report. I now call on my colleagues here and in the other place to join together and see this through as soon as possible.

The Greens support the Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 as a tiny step in the right direction by implementing two recommendations of the Set the standard report. There is still so much to do, but this is a start. These amendments will prevent staff from being able to be arbitrarily fired for no reason other than that they have become a political problem for their employer. We know from Set the standard that the broad powers of parliamentarians to fire staff without cause has been a significant barrier. It has stopped staff from coming forward because they fear that their job, not the job of their abuser, would be at risk if they did.

Requiring reasons to be given is not a complete solution, and we know that this change alone will not change the culture of shaming in silence that stops staff from coming forward. That cultural shift requires full implementation of the Set the standard recommendations: a robust, independent and well-resourced complaints process; trauma-informed training for all parliamentarians and senior staff; a code of conduct with meaningful options to sanction abusers and those who facilitate or ignore abuse; and genuine work for a more inclusive and representative parliament and parliamentary workforce. The Greens support this full suite of measures and will work to ensure the parliament adopts them as a matter of urgency.

The bill also makes clear that all parliamentarians have obligations, as officers under the Work Health and Safety Act, to provide a safe workplace. We welcome that. But the Respect@Work report made it clear that those obligations are not enough to protect staff against harassment, bullying and assault. What is needed in this workplace and in others is a positive duty on officers to ensure that staff are safe—where there is a zero tolerance policy in action, not just in words, and where appropriate support is available. A positive duty was the foundation of the Respect@Work recommendations for making workplaces safe. Without that duty, other reforms are built on very shaky ground.

The government voted against amendments moved by the Greens and Labor last year to introduce a positive duty. Despite vague assurances that they are working on it, we are yet to see a positive duty. Belatedly, yesterday, the Attorney-General's department released a discussion paper seeking consultation on a positive duty and several other outstanding recommendations under the Respect@Work report. Again, we welcome that progress but question why it has taken so long. Despite it being a key recommendation of a report delivered to the government nearly two years ago, workers are unlikely to get the protection of a positive duty before the election. The Greens will continue to push for a positive duty until every worker in every workplace feels safe and respected.

The final thing this bill does is ensure that MOP(S) Act staff are covered by the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. This fills critical gaps in the protections offered to MOP(S) Act staff. It is also a reminder that the abuse detailed in the Set the standard report is extensive and varied. The attention has been on sexual harassment and assault but we must not ignore the reports of racism, ableism and ageism in this place. People of colour, people with disability and older women have all reported that their harassment was compounded by discrimination—that they were targeted more, believed and supported less and, too often, driven from this workplace. We can't look around this room and pretend we don't have a representation problem.

The bravery of women like Rachelle Miller, Chelsey Potter, Brittany Higgins, Josie Coles, Saxon Mullins, Chanel Contos and Grace Tame is a key reason that we are even debating this bill today. But it is critical to remember those courageous women are not the only ones who have been abused, they are not the only ones who have come forward. Too often the experiences of women of colour, people with disability, older women and LGBTIQA+ people are ignored, diminished or misunderstood. My Senate colleagues Senator Thorpe, Senator Faruqi and Senator Cox can all attest to this. Each of them experiences abuse and harassment within this building, outside it and online that I cannot even imagine. It's appalling and shameful, and it will persist without serious cultural change. Until we have a more diverse and inclusive parliament and parliamentary workforce, this problem will not go away.

Last week my Senate colleague Senator Waters, the Greens' leader in the Senate, read a statement from survivor Dhanya Mani, who has pleaded with this parliament and directly to the Prime Minister to acknowledge the lack of diversity and to ensure that women of colour are not written out of the story of why things need to change:

If this parliament fails to act, it is tacitly endorsing and aggravating impenetrable barriers to equality for diverse, minority, identifying Australians. This country cannot achieve inclusive healthy progress for women in political life until and unless we start recognising and validating the vital work of women of colour and First Nations women in making opportunities for feminist cultural reckoning and reform possible.

On behalf of the Greens, I welcome this bill. I also urge the government to act decisively on recommendations 5 to 9 of the Set the standard report, to improve access, diversity and inclusivity in this place. This bill is the first tiny step in the right direction. It finally does some of the things that Dhanya and others have been asking the government to do for years. The Greens will work to ensure that this parliament urgently takes the rest of the steps needed to really turn things around and make parliamentary workplaces, and all workplaces, safe, equal, inclusive and respectful.

The Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 will make initial changes to four pieces of legislation in order to implement recommendations 17 and 24 of the Set the standard report of the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces, otherwise known as the Jenkins report. Just a reminder: Kate Jenkins, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, is also a proud Goldstein constituent.

The bill will progress important and significant reforms to help ensure that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are workplaces where expected standards of behaviour are modelled, championed and enforced, where respectful behaviour is standard and where any Australian, no matter their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, disability or age, feels safe and welcome to contribute.

The bill will amend the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 to strengthen and clarify the employment rights of MOP(S) Act employees. The bill removes any doubt that the Fair Work Act 2009 applies to MOP(S) Act employees by making this explicit, and will require parliamentarians to provide written reasons where they dismiss an employee from employment. These amendments result in additional information being provided to employees who are being terminated, which will also result in an update to current forms required to terminate employees consistent with Commissioner Jenkins's recommendations.

The grounds for dismissing an employee have not changed. They may include: a restructure of the office which calls for different sets of employee skills; unsatisfactory performance or conduct by the employee; where the parliamentarian has lost trust or confidence in the employee; and where the employee has a significant conflict of interest.

The bill will amend the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 to clarify that parliamentarians are officers of the Commonwealth for the purposes of the Work Health and Safety Act. This bill will amend the Age Discrimination Act 2004 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to put beyond doubt that MOP(S) Act employees have protection from age and disability discrimination, consistent with recent amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984.

The government has, on a number of occasions, indicated support for the report's recommendations. The government has worked with the opposition, other parties and independents to establish a leadership task force to help drive implementation. A first meeting of the task force, independently chaired by Ms Kerri Hartland, was held on 3 February 2022. The task force will be integral to ensuring progress on all the Jenkins report recommendations, noting not all the recommendations are solely for the government to implement. For the recommendations that are solely within the government's responsibility, the intention is that these be implemented within the recommendation time frames. Thus far, the recommendations are on track. The government is, of course, conscious that the recommendations are complex, and it is making sure to work through the issues carefully.

This bill will provide additional protections to MOP(S) Act employees and provide clear intent that the government is committed to implementing the recommendations of the Jenkins report. Significantly, the reforms in the legislative package would ensure that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful and that the nation's parliament serves as a model workplace for our nation and strives for best practice in the prevention and handling of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Of course, all of us in this chamber, I would hope, would never need to resort to such obligations, but the practical reality is that sometimes they may occur. But the hope is that we can build a culture within this workplace where everybody feels a sense of dignity, respect for their work and inclusion. That really is one of the many factors that motivate not just me but many members who appear before this chamber: we come to this place to make a better nation. Of course, as many speakers have remarked, no-one should come to the Commonwealth parliament and feel that they are not a full participant in our nation and its success. We should be a model workplace. We sometimes have fallen short in the past, sometimes very egregiously and seriously. Our responsibility as members of parliament from this point forward is to show that we have learned the lessons from the past, from those who have engaged in misconduct; to ensure that it does not occur again; and, critically, to recognise the excellent work that has been done by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins.

As I remarked before, obviously in my former capacity as Australia's Human Rights Commissioner I had some dealings with Commissioner Jenkins in her capacity as Victoria's Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commissioner, where she did an equally excellent job. She's done an outstanding job in compiling this report and providing a pathway for those who have worked in and around the parliament presently and in the past to bring forward their concerns and ensure that they are heard with respect. I also participated in the inquiry, and I was very happy to do so. I outlined the challenges that are faced across the board. It's not just, of course, the concerns that staff have brought, although they're immensely important and I'm glad they have been given voice. Members of parliament also have their own concerns about how some of the legal and practical applications of the law and culture of Parliament House occur and about the power imbalances. The environment that's created is a consequence of those hard power imbalances in the workplace as well as soft power imbalances that exist too.

We all share a collective will and ambition to address these issues as part of improving a workplace to make it one that every Australian can be proud of, not just because they can look to their nation's parliament as a model workplace but so that the stain that has occurred from serious allegations of misconduct in the past does not continue to diminish this parliament, because it should be a beacon of light for the nation about what we can achieve when we work together to improve the health and welfare of our nation.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

by leave—I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The bill amends the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Electoral Act) and the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 (Referendum Act) to strengthen the integrity of Australia's electoral communication framework and reduce the risk of foreign influence on Australian elections.

Foreign electoral communication and expenditure

This bill amends the Electoral Act to prohibit foreign individuals and entities, known in the bill as 'foreign campaigners', from authorising the communication of electoral matter. This amendment will support the integrity of Australian electoral processes by ensuring that only those with a legitimate connection to Australia are able to authorise electoral communications.

This bill builds on past reforms that established prohibitions on the receipt of foreign donations, including the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Funding and Disclosure Reform) Act 2018, and the more recent Electoral Legislation Amendment (Annual Disclosure Equality) Act 2021.

The bill will prohibit foreign campaigners from incurring electoral expenditure of $1,000 or more in a financial year, or fundraising for that purpose, to ensure that foreign actors cannot fund electoral campaigns using an Australian notifying entity.

The bill also ensures existing bans on fundraising for the purpose of incurring electoral expenditure for unregistered entities that are required to register with the Australian Electoral Commission are applied consistently.

These amendments effectively address a potential 'loophole' where foreign donors may be able to circumvent the existing restrictions within the Electoral Act by conducting and funding electoral campaigns directly.

The amendments prohibiting foreign campaigners utilise the existing definition of 'foreign donor', making these amendments simple to apply.

These amendments are necessary to support the integrity of Australia's electoral system by ensuring that foreign influence through electoral campaigns is kept out of Australian elections.

Increasing maximum penalty for misleading voter s in relation to the casting of their vote

Currently, the penalty for contravening section 329 of the Electoral Act—misleading or deceiving an elector in relation to the casting of their vote—does not reflect the potential seriousness and scale of such an offence in contemporary digital and telecommunication environments.

This bill will uplift the maximum sentence of imprisonment for contravening this provision to three years or 100 penalty units for a natural person and 500 penalty units for a body corporate.

This uplift will be a greater deterrent for persons seeking to mislead, deceive or otherwise interfere with an elector's free exercise of their vote.

The bill also increases the penalty in the equivalent provision in the Referendum Act.

Conclusion

Threats of foreign influence in federal elections risk the erosion of public confidence in the electoral process.

This bill's prohibition on foreign persons from authorising electoral matter, or fundraising or directly incurring electoral expenditure, will minimise the risk of foreign influence in Australian democracy, and demonstrates the government's strong commitment to improving the robustness and integrity of Australia's electoral processes.

I commend this bill.

Debate adjourned.

Leave granted for second reading debate to resume at a later hour this day.

I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Today I introduce the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Authorisations) Bill 2022.

This bill makes minor and technical amendments to the notifying requirements in the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Electoral Act) for the authorisation of electoral communications.

These amendments will make the information provided in authorisations more useful to voters by requiring registered political parties and disclosure entities to use their current registered name in authorisations for electoral communications.

Currently, parties are required to use their name as included on their most recent return lodged with the Australian Electoral Commission under Part XX of the Electoral Act. This amendment will reduce the potential for voter confusion by ensuring that the name a registered political party is required to use in the notifying particulars for electoral communications is the same as the party's name as it appears on the ballot paper.

Similarly, the amendments will require disclosure entities that are not registered political parties to use their name as most recently entered on the Transparency Register rather than their most recent return under Part XX of the Electoral Act.

The bill also provides some limited flexibility for registered political parties in how they present their names in authorisations. This streamlines these requirements, and avoids unnecessary duplication, without detracting from clear communication with voters.

For example, political parties who have the word 'incorporated' in their registered name would be able to omit this word.

Similarly, the bill enables registered political parties which are a branch or division of a federal party to omit the words which specifically refer to the branch or division. This avoids unnecessary duplication, noting that authorisations already require entities to specify their location as part of their notifying particulars.

The bill also amends the authorisation requirements for referendum communications and political communications in the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983, the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Special Broadcasting Service Act 1991for consistency and alignment with the Electoral Act.

Conclusion

This bill demonstrates the government's commitment to reduce voter confusion and unnecessary red tape and regulation. These amendments aim to make authorisation requirements clearer and more consistent across the relevant acts.

I commend this bill.

Debate adjourned.

I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Today I introduce the Electoral Legislation Amendment (COVID Enfranchisement) Bill 2022.

This measure builds upon the powers granted to the Australian Electoral Commissioner under the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Contingency Measures) Act 2021 and the measures the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) is already taking to deliver a COVID-safe election.

The bill amends the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Electoral Act) to allow the option to provide a contingency arrangement for electors in mandatory isolation or quarantine due to COVID-19 during the final 72 hours before polling to participate in the upcoming federal election.

It can allow regulations to be made to expand the Australian Electoral Commission's existing secure telephone voting service to persons in mandatory isolation due to COVID-19.

This accessibility of this service would be limited to some or all persons in Australia subject to a public health order that prevents attendance at a polling place for the following reasons:

Further access to telephone voting for coronavirus affected persons can only be enlivened where the Electoral Commissioner has issued an instrument advising that he is satisfied on reasonable grounds that the extension of this service is necessary or conducive to ensure the due conduct of an election. The Electoral Commissioner will be required to notify the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition before issuing a legislative instrument which must also be published on the AEC website. The Electoral Commissioner must also inform them about any integrity measures that will apply to safeguard the conduct of the poll using the telephone method of participation. This instrument would enliven the process for telephone voting in accordance with the rules set out in the regulations. The regulations will have the option to specify the circumstances and the order of admission for votes cast using this method. These provisions will automatically repeal on 31 December 2022.

This bill demonstrates the government's commitment to enhancing the franchise to ensure eligible voters have an opportunity to vote. These amendments proactively respond to also assist the AEC in conducting safe, efficient and timely elections in a COVID-19 environment. I commend this bill.

Debate adjourned.

To make it clear, Labor supports this package of bills. I'll come to each of the bills in a moment, but first I move:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) notes that the explanatory memorandum states that the bill's intention is to strengthen the integrity of Australia's electoral system;

(2) further notes that Australia's electoral system would be further strengthened by;

(a) lowering the disclosure threshold from the current $14,500 to a fixed $1,000 so political donations are transparent for all to see;

(b) requiring real time disclosure of political donations;

(c) providing more resources to the AEC to increase enrolment and turnout;

(d) addressing the spread of dangerous misinformation and disinformation;

(e) legislating for a powerful and independent National Anti- Corruption Commission;

(f) making laws to prevent governments from pork-barrelling in marginal held seats; and

(g) requiring parliamentarians to disclose secret donations; and

(3) calls on the Government to implement these electoral integrity measures which would make a real difference to improving public confidence in our democracy".

As I said, Labor supports this package of bills. The Electoral Legislation Amendment (Foreign Influences and Offences) Bill 2022 closes a loophole to ensure that foreign entities cannot incur electoral expenditure for the purposes of federal elections.

In 2018, the parliament legislated to ban participants in federal elections from receiving political donations from foreign sources, and let's be clear about this: it was Labor that fought for a ban on foreign donations. This government had to be dragged kicking and screaming to that position. Indeed, you can say that generally of just about every electoral reform that has happened in this country for decades. It is always Labor that is calling for improvements to our electoral system. It is always Labor that is calling for improvements to our donations system, and, regrettably, the Liberal and National parties have to be dragged kicking and screaming to come to even modest reforms. It was Labor from opposition that secured amendments to the legislation to ensure that foreign donations were banned but that charities and civil advocacy groups were not unfairly impacted and could still participate in our democracy.

This bill makes a useful adjustment to the laws passed in 2018. It will close a loophole that allows a foreign entity itself to incur electoral expenditure and communicate electoral matter. Currently, regrettably, it is not prohibited for a foreign government, company or individual to campaign for a candidate or on an issue at a federal election. This is clearly at odds with the ban on foreign donations and must be corrected, and that's what this first bill does. This bill's provisions prevent a foreign entity from incurring electoral expenditure of greater than $1,000 or fundraising for that purpose, further protecting our democracy from foreign interference.

In addition to banning foreign entities from incurring electoral expenditure, this bill also bans them from authorising electoral material. Penalties and anti-avoidance provisions similar to the existing provisions in relation to the ban on foreign donations apply. The provisions in this bill ensure that only people or entities with a link to Australia can participate in our elections, and that, of course, is an entirely appropriate provision. Australian elections are for Australian citizens and we need to take every step we can think of to ensure that only people and entities who have proper links to Australia can participate.

Labor have always believed that we should do everything we can to avoid foreign influence in our elections, so, of course, we support closing any loopholes. But we understand that this government will always seek to play politics with these issues, and we've seen that as recently as this past weekend. This is a government that acts only it's in its own electoral interests. The Prime Minister has shown that he's willing to throw mud and mistruths, because he thinks running a scare campaign will help him win the next election.

Over the years, there have been a number of issues on all sides where attempts have been made by foreign actors to undermine our democracy. We've seen that foreign interference is a feature of other democracies around the world. We must be vigilant in protecting Australia's democracy and ensure that we maintain the faith of the Australian people. Labor is committed to ensuring that the integrity of our elections, the integrity of our parliament and the integrity of our democratic institutions are protected. As a parliament, we must act with unity on this issue.

I hope that we will see no more of the pathetic attempts that have been made in recent weeks by the defence minister and, regrettably, by the Prime Minister to try to politicise matters of national security. That should form no part of the political debate in our country. It should form no part of political debate in this House. We must not have ministers, let alone senior ministers, seeking to politicise national security information—seeking to make innuendos and insinuations based on national security information that they are forbidden from revealing publicly but implying that there is something about the classified information that comes to them that allows them to make the kinds of partisan slurs that we've seen in recent weeks from the Prime Minister, the defence minister and, regrettably, from other ministers. We hope that we see no more of that kind of behaviour that we've seen the last few weeks. Indeed, I would urge the government to make sure of it.

To return to the bills, Labor will always examine every piece of legislation to make sure that it is in the national interest. We believe that the provisions in this bill—the first bill in the package—will help protect our electoral system and democratic institutions from foreign interference. We've seen that, in addition to the foreign influences provisions, the bill also increases the penalty for publishing material that is misleading in relation to the casting of a vote. We've witnessed the harmful effects of former President Donald Trump's efforts to undermine faith in the integrity of the US electoral system—persistently sowing the seeds of doubt and mistrust and, appallingly, inciting violence in a scheme to discredit the election of the president most recently held in the United States of America. Let's hope that no Australian politician sees it as being to their advantage or is so prepared to act in such a shameful fashion in relation to our electoral system, and I say that because Australia's electoral system is one of the best in the world.

The Australian Electoral Commission is proudly independent, and it ensures, of course, that the integrity of elections is its priority. By increasing the penalty for the existing offence of misleading or deceiving someone in relation to the casting of a vote from six months to three years, the Australian Federal Police will be given increased power to investigate this offence. That's because account takeover warrants and data disruption warrants—which are some of the powers that Labor has worked with the government to create in recent years to add to the armoury of powers that is available to the Australian Federal Police and which are quite serious powers—can only be sought by the Australian Federal Police for crimes which carry a penalty of at least three years imprisonment. So the effect of increasing the penalties from six months to three years for these particular offences of misleading or deceiving someone in relation to the casting of a vote will mean that those more serious and sweeping powers will be available to the AFP in relation to these electoral offences. We would say that increasing the penalty will, thus, greatly assist the Australian Federal Police in investigating any breaches of the current provisions in the upcoming election.

I will turn now to the second bill—the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Authorisations) Bill 2022—which makes a minor amendment to the law relating to the authorisation of electoral matter. Electoral matter or material that is communicated for the purposes of influencing how someone votes in an election must be authorised, so that voters know who is communicating that material. The framework for authorisation of electoral communications is contained in the Commonwealth Electoral Act, the referendum act, the Broadcasting Services Act, the ABC Act, the SBS Act and some related determinations. This bill will align the authorisation requirements across all of those acts in an effort to achieve consistency.

Currently, the Electoral Act requires political parties to include in the authorisation particulars the name of the party as written in their most recent election return provided to the Australian Electoral Commission. This bill changes that to make clear that the name of the party in the authorisation must be the name that is registered in the AEC's register of political parties. The bill thus will allow political parties to use a shortened version of their registered name in certain circumstances. Extraneous words may be omitted, such as 'branch' or 'division' or 'incorporated'. Replicating abbreviations or the name of the state or territory can be omitted from the authorisation. In addition, if the name includes the words 'of Australia' or has 'Australia' at the end of the name, those words may also be omitted from the authorisation line.

In the Senate, Labor successfully amended this bill—that is, the second of the bills in the package, the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Authorisations) Bill 2022—to allow the use of a party's registered abbreviation. This will simplify the authorisation line while still allowing the purpose of the authorisation revisions to be achieved. That purpose is, of course, to identify the political party that is communicating the material. To sum this up, it's an abbreviating authorisation, but, nevertheless, absolutely preserving the purpose of the authorisation provision so that, when people see electoral material being communicated in whatever form, they know where that material comes from, because the political party will have to be sufficiently identified in the authorisation.

It is of course the case that many political parties are commonly known by their registered abbreviation, including my great party, the ALP, or another party in this parliament, the Greens, and every political party's registered name and abbreviation is available for public viewing on the register of political parties on the AEC's website. So there isn't, in fact, going to be room for doubt. But the sense of it will mean that a full, elaborate, formal title is not required to be used; rather, what we're aiming to achieve is clear identification of who authorised the electoral matter that is being communicated.

The changes in this bill will apply to all forms of electoral matter but will be particularly useful where the authorisation is spoken, such as in video messages or TV commercials. TV commercials are expensive. Time in video messages and TV commercials is expensive. It will mean that more broadcast time can be used for the message itself while still maintaining that purpose, which is allowing voters to easily identify the authorising party.

Finally, I'll come to the Electoral Legislation Amendment (COVID Enfranchisement) Bill 2022, the purpose of which is to allow COVID affected Australians to vote at the upcoming election. It is regrettably the fact that we remain in a global pandemic. It is regrettably a feature of the global pandemic with which all Australians have become only too familiar—that another outbreak may yet come to us. We all fervently hope that this current omicron outbreak is the last outbreak of this virus, but the experience over the last two terrible years has shown us that that may not be the case.

To that end, it's entirely appropriate that provision be made for the possibility that there will be COVID affected Australians at the time of the upcoming election. It's assuring the rights of those COVID affected Australians to vote that these provisions are directed to. That is brought about by extending existing provisions for secure telephone voting for Antarctic voters and secure telephone voting for those who are blind or vision impaired to COVID affected electors. It will only be available to voters who are in mandatory isolation or quarantine during the last 72 hours of the election campaign and who are therefore unable to attend a polling place or apply for a postal vote. It'll simply mean that, if you are in that unfortunate position, where you haven't voted at prepoll and haven't voted by means of a postal vote and in the last 72 hours of the election campaign because you were perhaps intending to attend prepoll or to vote on election day and you find yourself regrettably COVID affected, there will now be a means available for you to vote.

Voters will need to have tested positive for COVID-19, using a TGA approved test, or be a close contact of a COVID-positive person or have otherwise been directed to self-isolate or quarantine. The provisions in this bill will only be used if the Electoral Commissioner makes a determination on reasonable grounds that they are necessary or conducive for the conduct of the election. What we would envisage occurring is that the Electoral Commissioner will take health advice as indeed government officials, agencies and ministers both at the federal level and at the state level have taken the advice of our health experts throughout the pandemic—or, at least, that's what should have occurred. That will occur, too, for the Electoral Commissioner, who will determine whether the circumstances of the current state of the pandemic at the time that the election is held are such that this determination is needed. Before making such a determination, the Electoral Commissioner will be required by this legislation to notify both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, and the determination will have to be published on the AEC's website.

There will be telephone voting for COVID affected electors. It will be available from 6.01 pm on the Wednesday before polling day—that is, after the cut-off for a postal vote application—until the close of the polls on election day. It's entirely consistent with more than 100 years of reform of our electoral system, one could say throughout the whole of Federation. I happen to think that the introduction of compulsory voting in early 1920s marked a tremendous improvement in our voting system, something that has become ingrained in political practice of Australians, ingrained in the way in which Australians think about our electoral system in our political system. Voting is a right and also a duty. Everybody is required to both register and vote.

What goes with having both compulsory registration and compulsory voting requirements, which only a minority of other democratic countries in the world share as a system—it's a substantial number but still a minority of democratic countries that have compulsory registration and compulsory voting—is the need to make voting as easy and available to all Australians as it can possibly be made. This kind of provision, making it possible for COVID affected voters to nevertheless cast their votes even if they've missed out on prepoll or a postal vote and won't be able to attend because of quarantine requirements or isolation requirements on voting day, means they will still be given, by this legislation, the possibility of a means by which they can cast their votes. The bill contains a sunset clause. The provisions will automatically expire on 31 December 2022. These provisions are a sensible solution to allow those who are isolating to exercise their democratic right.

I do note that the government of South Australia, the Marshall government, does seem to be confused about how it should be dealing with this issue. It is a very simple fix, but the South Australian Premier, Steven Marshall, refuses to recall parliament to ensure that everyone will have a chance to vote in that state 's upcoming election. It's amazing that, amongst all the chaos and division that's come to be the hallmark of this government, the federal government can see sense in moving this particular provision and extending access even for those who are COVID affected on election day.

Labor has always fought for the enfranchisement of every citizen of this country. We fought for and achieved two guaranteed seats in the House of Representatives for the Northern Territory when this government wanted it to be reduced to just one. We fought against discriminatory voter ID laws that would have seen some of the most marginalised people in Australia stripped of their democratic rights and seen queues around the block at polling places. We have agitated for a restoration of the AEC's Darwin office; ridiculously, this government removed the AEC office in Darwin, pretending wrongly that the services of the AEC could be provided to the whole of the Northern Territory—that vast area of our country—from the Brisbane office of the AEC. It is vital that every eligible Australian has the opportunity to vote at this election. No-one should be disenfranchised as a result of this government's failures in managing this pandemic. This bill is a sensible solution to ensure that that doesn't happen.

Voters have woken up to this Prime Minister. They know that only a Labor government will restore integrity to our parliament. There is so much more we could be doing to improve the integrity of our electoral system. It's to that end that I moved a second reading amendment to this bill at the start of this speech. As you would have heard, Deputy Speaker Goodenough, it's a second reading amendment that refers to a number of other measures we should be moving towards, such as lowering the disclosure threshold from the current $14,500 to a fixed $1,000 so that political donations are transparent for all to see. We should be moving to real-time disclosure of political donations. We should be providing more resources to the AEC to increase enrolment and turnout.

On the first couple of those—lowering the disclosure threshold from the current $14,500 to a fixed $1,000 so that political donations are transparent for all to see and requiring real-time disclosure of political donations: we are still enduring the ridiculous position created by the Howard government when it introduced $10,000 as the threshold for electoral disclosure and indexed it, which has produced the current, even more ridiculous situation where the threshold for disclosure is $14,500. Labor has been agitating for years and years and years for that $14,500 threshold, which is continuing to rise, to be lowered to $1,000 and to be fixed so that people know that if they donate more than $1,000 it is definitely going to be disclosed.

The other reform that we have again been calling for many years but the Liberal and National parties remain obdurately opposed to is real-time disclosure, which has now been achieved in Queensland at the state level. It has been a tremendous benefit to the integrity of electoral processes and of political parties themselves in that state, because it's possible to see not 18 months after the donation is made—which is the time period you can in fact have under the current federal system; that's how long it can take for a public disclosure to be made. It doesn't need to be 18 months if you're making the donation somewhat closer to the disclosure date, but it could be up to 18 months between the making of the donation and the time at which it is disclosed. The whole point of requiring disclosure is that voters will be aware of who is giving large amounts of money to the political parties they are being asked to vote for.

Finally, I mention these other matters that I mentioned in the second reading amendment. We need to do more to give more resources to the AEC and we should be legislating for a powerful and independent national anticorruption commission—something this government has admitted today in estimates it is not going to do. Labor will. Labor is committed to creating a national anticorruption commission.

Debate interrupted.

The Morrison government continues to ignore the people of Brand, having not made an election commitment locally for the last two elections. That's a staggering almost nine years that the Liberals have failed to commit to an investment in the future of local children and the future of the hardworking people of Brand. The Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, was happy to throw away a million dollars of taxpayer money to support Clive Palmer's court case against all Western Australians, but he is not happy to invest that money in you.

I say to the people of Brand: a federal Labor government will be on your side. I am on your side. Only Labor has the plan to create jobs and boost the local economy. Only Labor has a plan for free TAFE to help provide opportunities for school leavers and workers wanting to retrain or upskill and for women wanting to get back into the workforce. Only Labor has a plan for cheaper child care. Only Labor will protect Medicare.

The best thing you can do for a young person is give them a chance at a good education and good skills training. Labor will invest in the skills Australians need to get ahead by providing free TAFE and creating more university places. Labor's $1.2 billion Future Made in Australia Skills Plan focuses on tackling skills shortages to help us all move forward through COVID-19 and drive future economic growth. For nearly a decade, the Liberal government has cut TAFE and slashed apprenticeships. Today, we have 70,000 fewer apprenticeships and traineeships compared to 2013. Labor's Future Made in Australia Skills Plan will be good for the people of Rockingham and Kwinana to train or retrain for skills that employers are looking for. Labor's skill plan will also help local businesses that need skilled workers. Labor will also deliver up to 20,000 new university places to fix shortages and fill future skills needs by training Australians in jobs—including engineering, nursing, tech and training—because Australia's economic future lies with its strongest asset, its people.

The cost of child care is an issue that local families often raise with me—and why shouldn't they? Childcare fees have increased by 8.6 per cent over the past year across Perth—8.6 per cent!—when CPI inflation over the same period was just 3.5 per cent. Since the Liberals were elected, childcare fees have gone up 35 per cent. All the while, real wages have gone backwards. Families in my electorate of Brand are trying to get ahead and, as usual, this Morrison government just leaves them behind. Labor will scrap the $10,560 limit on the childcare subsidy, lift the maximum childcare subsidy rate to 90 per cent and increase the childcare subsidy rates for every family earning less than $530,000. Eighty-six per cent of families with children under the age of six will be better off under Labor's childcare policy. The Prime Minister insists that families have never been better off—a hollow statement easily disproved by the lived experience of the families right across the electorate of Brand. I ask the Prime Minister to stop insulting the intelligence of people in my electorate.

I would like to talk about a constituent in my electorate named Christy Lewis. Christy is an NDIS participant with a degenerative spinal condition. Christy first contacted my office in August last year, after her condition deteriorated and she required 24/7 care and specialist disability housing. The NDIA had advised her against requesting a new plan for this support, as it would supposedly delay the approval of her much-needed specialist housing. This was despite a history of falls and a medical condition that could cut the blood supply to her kidney if she fell unattended, a life-threatening possibility. Seven months later, Christy has neither specialist housing nor funding for the 24/7 support. Despite the best efforts of my staff, months of delays and inaction by the NDIA have left her without life-saving care she needs to survive and to thrive.

Labor created the NDIS to be the best in the world, but years of neglect, maladministration and cost-cutting by successive Liberal governments have sullied that dream. NDIS participants cannot afford another term of this heartless Liberal government. Some of them might not survive it.

On Friday last week, the Deputy Prime Minister, Minister Keith Pitt, state member for Callide Colin Boyce and I were in Bundaberg for the announcement of the $600 million to match the Queensland state government contribution to rebuild the Paradise Dam. The request came from the Queensland government. The dam was built in 2005 by the Queensland Labor government and has quite a history, but it was plagued from the very start by serious construction failures. Cost-saving methods then have proven very costly in the long run. It should have been built properly in the first place.

The decision to rebuild was very well received by the growers in Bundaberg and Childers and the farmers at Coalstoun Lakes. These growers are desperate for continuous, reliable, affordable water. Prior to the dam being partly knocked down, trees had already been planted. These trees are only surviving from what they can get out of the air, from rainfall. It's reported that the Bundaberg region supplies 25 per cent of Australia's fruit and veg.

Now that the funding is in place, it is so important to get the dam rebuilt. In 2019, a couple of years ago, the Queensland government, for safety reasons, reduced the height of the wall by 5.8 metres and reduced the capacity of the dam to 42 per cent. Once rebuilt, the dam's full capacity will go up again to 300,000 megalitres, to give businesses and households confidence that they can access the water that they need. This will have lasting effects for decades and decades to come.

To rebuild the part of the dam wall that was knocked down will create 250 construction jobs and unlock new investments in the Bundaberg-Wide Bay area. It will also lead to other water projects in the North and South Burnett catchment areas. Cooranga Weir on the Boyne River between Proston and Mundubbera has been planned, but nothing has been done for years. A Coalstoun Lakes irrigation pipeline is mooted for those local farmers. A few years ago, I obtained $2 million from the federal government to conduct a water study for the North and South Burnett. The feasibility studies are now completed. Now that the decision has been made on the Paradise Dam, we can progress those projects in the North and South Burnett.

Other water projects in Flynn that we can talk about include the Bedford Weir. The Bedford Weir a few years ago had a bladder on top of the existing wall. In a tragic accident, that bladder burst—hence the new regulations that no more bladders can be placed on dam walls. The bursting of that bladder had tragic consequences: it poured onto people below who were having a picnic, resulting in tragic loss of life. So our government has seen fit to restore some of that water that was lost with the bladder bursting. Paranui Weir will be a new weir if the feasibility stacks up, and that's situated between Theodore and Moura on the mighty Dawson River. This is a highly agricultural area, and all it lacks is water. So there's $2 million of funding available for the feasibility study for the Paranui Weir and $1.7 million for the Bedford raising. So, with that, there are plenty of other— (Time expired)

We continue to see and hear about the rise of Independents in the lead-up to the next federal election, and, almost universally, these incumbents and candidates are working on election platforms including three major issues. They are climate change, gender inequality and integrity. The reason that Independents are prioritising these issues and gaining traction is not because they're a party, as some misguided government members have asserted, but because these issues are inherently important and the community genuinely cares about them and intends to prioritise them at the election.

Moreover, these are three issues that, to different degrees, both major parties have let us down on repeatedly, and the community is sick and tired of that. For example, the government and opposition are basically in lockstep on climate change. For instance, both parties have committed to opening new fossil fuel power stations if elected, both parties continue to put forward false solutions like gas and carbon capture and storage, and both parties have committed to net zero by 2050, which we know is just a dangerous distraction from what's really needed.

Furthermore, the government and opposition continue to misdirect and spread confusion about issues like emissions reductions and renewable energy, and again it has been left to the crossbench to call this out. For example, my National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Amendment (Transparency in Carbon Emissions Accounting) Bill would require Australia to keep track of its enormous contribution to global fossil fuels. Meanwhile, other crossbenchers have introduced legislation that pushes for a phase-out of fossil fuels as soon as possible, genuinely fast-tracks renewables and codifies ambitious net zero targets. Time and time again it has been the crossbench who have taken genuine action on climate change in this parliament.

Another issue where the government has spectacularly failed is gender equality, despite gender inequality and gendered violence continuing to be a major issue in the country. That's why I joined over 100,000 people in the March4Justice and listened to, and continue to listen to, the many strong voices demanding change. I simply can't understand why the government is not doing the same. Remember, a woman is still being killed each week in Australia due to family violence. Remember also that these are not women's issues but men's issues and that the shocking abuse of power and privilege by some men must stop. But to achieve real change we need more women in parliament and in other positions of power, we need to fully implement the Jenkins report and we need to fix the gender pay gap and other barriers preventing women from fully participating in the workforce.

It's pretty obvious as the 46th Parliament draws to a close that people are very unhappy with the state of politics. Indeed, things are so bad right now that many in the community hold politicians, politics and political parties in contempt. But this can be fixed, and again it's the Independents who have laid the groundwork.

First and foremost, Australia needs a federal integrity agency, but sadly politics and governance at the federal level has become so compromised that the last thing the federal government wants is an effective integrity agency. I'm not talking about the half baked agency the federal government said it would deliver but then never actually got around to. No. I'm talking about an effective integrity agency, one implementing the broadest definition of corruption that can take referrals from anyone, hold public hearings, make findings of guilt and go after politicians and their staff.

Secondly, we need political donation reform, which is why yesterday I introduced a bill to strengthen the transparency and accountability of political donations in Australia. My bill requires real-time disclosure, lowers the donation disclosure threshold to $1,000 aggregated—that is, in gross terms—that implements caps on donations and electoral expenditure, that expands the definition of gift and that prohibits political donations from particular industries.

Other key changes needed include improved whistleblower legal protection, for those who shine a light on misconduct; media freedom laws, to ensure the community knows what's actually going on; and the creation of 'truth in political advertising' laws. There is still much work to be done. I certainly hope that I am back here in the next parliament, and I look forward to more Independents joining me, so that we can continue to hold the big parties to account and to push for the real reform that the community is crying out for.

The south-east of South Australia is no stranger to bushfires. We've certainly had our fair share. While the memory of Ash Wednesday is still very raw for many in the Limestone Coast community, every fire season firefighters continue to stand ready to defend not only their own properties and their own communities but also those of others. This summer, fires in South Australia meant we were fighting fires on many fronts, but I want to talk this evening about a fire at Coles in my electorate. It's 20 kilometres south of Lucindale and 350 kays from Adelaide. This was the Lucindale community's third fire in three years, following the Killara fire over the new year period in 2020 and the Blackford fire in 2021.

The Coles fire started on 19 January and quickly spread, eventually burning almost 4,000 hectares of blue gums and farmland over four days. There was a significant amount of paddock feed and boundary fencing lost, but luckily no houses and livestock, thanks to the remarkable work of firefighting teams. Tragically, however, CFS volunteer Louise Hincks from the Happy Valley CFS was killed by a falling tree while she was bravely battling the fire. She was a dedicated volunteer who joined that organisation 28 years ago and was known to travel across South Australia to fight fires. Indeed, on this occasion Ms Hincks had travelled the 350 kilometres from her home in Adelaide to help the Lucindale community, a truly selfless act, and one that I'm certain the Lucindale community and the broader South Australian community will never forget. I extend my condolences to the Happy Valley CFS crew and to Ms Hincks's family for their loss. The Country Fire Service is a service made up of selfless individuals just like Ms Hincks, who place themselves in danger to keep others safe. After seeing the fire's aftermath firsthand a couple of weeks ago, it was clear that without the numerous fire units—from the air and on the ground—that fought this fire, the outcome could have been even worse. To the paid and unpaid professionals who fight fires and keep our communities safe and our homes and assets protected, I say: thank you.

I am proud to represent Barker, where so many are willing to serve their communities when they're needed the most. In rural and regional Australia we know that we are only as strong as our community, and the Country Fire Service reminds us every day that there are thousands of people in our state at the ready to put themselves in harm's way to protect others who they probably don't even know. That is why I'm such a huge supporter of the SA Volunteer Fire Fighters Museum located in Naracoorte. South Australia has a long and proud volunteer firefighting history. Some time ago a group of dedicated volunteers in Naracoorte, led by the unstoppable Rex Hall, undertook to establish a museum to honour that proud history. After many years of planning, including an $18,000 business case funded by the federal government via the Building Better Regions Fund, the museum officially opened in February 2020 on the anniversary of the Ash Wednesday bushfires. The museum specifically aims to research, record, conserve and promote the history and equipment of the South Australian volunteer fire service. The museum is also a constant reminder to all volunteer firefighters, past and present, that we appreciate their dedication and hard work in often dangerous or life-threatening conditions, leaving their own families, their homes and sometimes their communities to help others. I am extremely proud that a coalition government helped to fund stage 1 of the SA Volunteer Fire Fighters Museum in Naracoorte with a grant of $320,000. Rex Hall and the volunteers at the museum are now working towards stage 2, which will incorporate an auditorium, an interactive interpretive centre, administration facilities, meeting facilities and a replica of Naracoorte's first fire station. I'm supporting Rex and the volunteers at the museum with stage 2 and I'm working here in Canberra to investigate funding opportunities for this second stage.

I think it's important for our local communities, and indeed the state, to see the museum completed as a tribute and a reminder of the selfless hard work, dedication and sacrifice of our volunteer firefighters. So I will continue to fight to see this funding committed. (Time expired)

I commend the member for Barker on his fitting tribute to the loss of Ms Hincks. I think it's very important to mark that here in this place.

I come from a very proud manufacturing town. Ballarat workers, ever since the gold rush, have made things—and we still do today. Sadly, you can no longer buy Oliver shoes or Rivers clothes and you can't buy lingerie from the Lucas factory or Ballarat-made bells from John Bell. But there's still Haymes paint, Selkirk bricks and even Hakubaku Japanese organic noodles. Lovely confectionary from Mars, Gecko high-tech manufacturing equipment, McCain chips and right the way through to Deutscher hospital beds—these things are all made in my hometown of Ballarat.

Manufacturing is Ballarat's third largest industry, employing, on the most recent figures, almost 10 per cent of our overall workforce. We're proud of the livelihoods that it provides to so many families. Earlier this month I welcomed to Ballarat the member for Corio—a visitor from another proud manufacturing town, Geelong. Like the people in Geelong, Ballarat people know how important manufacturing is and how it needs to be nurtured by government. They know how much it hurt when the coalition government waved goodbye to the car industry, and they can see the damage inflicted by ongoing cuts to skills and training.

When the member for Corio came to town, the first place we went to was MaxiTRANS. For those who don't know, they build heavy duty semitrailers. At 75 years old, they are Australia 's largest trailer manufacturer. For Coles, Woolies and Toll interstate freight—any truck you see on the road—there is a very good chance that the trailer was made in my hometown of Ballarat. With the growing demand for freight, there is growing demand for their product. But they're being held back by a shortage of workers. In ideal conditions, MaxiTRANS would double their output. Their order book greatly exceeds their current capacity. They need 30 more welders alone, and even more labourers. And they told us that, if a welder walked through the door, they would give them a job and they might give one to their friends and family as well.

We need to get more Australian kids into these jobs—and more local kids. Soon the borders will open and we will have more overseas workers coming in, but we have a real opportunity to grow our skills base and train our kids for sustainable jobs well into the future. That's what the member for Corio and I spoke about at our next stop, Ballarat TAFE. The history of Ballarat TAFE is just as long as the history of manufacturing in Ballarat, stretching right back to the School of Mines in 1870. It is Australia 's fourth oldest tertiary facility and the oldest in the region. But what we saw was far more modern than that. We saw kids learning to weld via virtual reality, learning how to safely dig trenches, learning how to build a home and learning how to build our future—all in a state-of-the-art facility funded by the last Labor government.

Of course, there are not as many students as they could be. That's because the government has cut $3 billion out of TAFE. Across the country, there are 70,000 fewer traineeships and apprenticeships today than there were when Labor left office in 2013. In Ballarat, there has been a 15 per cent drop. That amounts to hundreds of workers who could be working today in our town raising their families, working good trades and helping businesses like MaxiTRANS reach their full potential. Unfortunately, nothing will change under this government. After nine long years, after almost a decade in office—and they are seeking a second decade—we know that.

The way to overcome local skill shortages is to train more local workers, delivering a win for local businesses and a win for locals who need an opportunity to get ahead. That's why Labor will provide free access to TAFE for Australians, create more university places and tackle the skills shortages that are holding our COVID-19 recovery back. Under Labor, Australians studying in an industry with a skills shortage will be supported through the provision of free TAFE. Our $1.2 billion Future Made in Australia Skills Plan will focus on closing the gap in key areas of skills shortages, with new places at university and at TAFE. This is a policy that's good for jobs and good for people looking to train or retrain, and it's good policy for businesses which need more skilled workers.

I'm proud of Ballarat's manufacturing history, but we want to have a manufacturing future, a future that can be made only here in Australia under an Albanese Labor government.

It's my absolute pleasure to rise tonight to recognise Braddon's 2022 Australia Day award recipients. Their dedicated service to our region is worthy of national recognition in this place.

My dear friend and former colleague Libby Perkins from Gunns Plains has been recognised for her work advocating for returned service personnel and her service to the Ulverstone RSL and the Ulverstone visitor centre. Libby's story is a truly remarkable one. Joining the Australian Army at the age of 17, she was recruited to the highly classified division during the Vietnam War, a role that has been immortalised in the movie Enigma and the BBC series The Bletchley Circle. Given the highly classified nature of her work, Libby couldn't tell anyone the vital role that she was playing; she simply told people that she was a typist. She kept this secret for 30 years. During this time the records of her service were misplaced and lost. This meant that for three decades, when she marched on Anzac Day, she simply did so as a civilian. Finally, in 2001, she received her service medals, but it wasn't with the fanfare or recognition that her service deserved. They simply turned up in the mail. In 2019 Libby finally received the public recognition that she deserved when the top-secret decoder was chosen to lay a wreath at the dawn service at Villers-Bretonneux on behalf of the Australian RSL. Congratulations, Libby Perkins OAM.

In early 2020, the north-west coast of Tasmania faced the most significant COVID-19 outbreak in the country. It was during this time that Tasmania Police's Commander Western District, Debbie Williams, was tasked with coordinating the region's emergency response. With the virus in its infancy, there was no rule book or SOP to follow, but Commander Williams led with distinction through one of the most testing times in living memory. For your efforts during the COVID outbreak and as a trailblazer for women in policing, congratulations, Commander Debbie Williams APM.

Rose-Anne Emmerton from Ulverstone has been awarded the Emergency Services Medal for her 13 years of volunteering and leadership. Rose-Anne is currently the unit manager with the Central Coast State Emergency Service, one of only six female managers in the state. She was there during the 2016 Tasmanian bushfires. She was on the ground during the 2020 COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown along the north-west coast, conducting welfare and compliance checks. Rose-Anne's goal is to showcase the vital work that Tasmania's 550 dedicated SES volunteers undertake each day. They provide assistance to hundreds of Tasmanians 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year, and I would like to add my voice to Rose-Anne 's advocacy. Volunteering with the SES is one of the most rewarding commitments that you can make to your community, and I would encourage anyone who's looking at volunteering to consider reaching out to their local SES. Congratulations, Rose-Anne Emmerton ESM.

For his commitment to the Ridgley community, Mr Graeme Jones has been awarded the Australian Fire Service Medal. Graeme was a founding member of the Ridgley Fire Brigade in 1978 and has continued to serve our community with distinction. Graeme's motivation is simply to give back, and I know that under Graeme's guidance our younger generation is being mentored by one of the best. Congratulations, Graeme Jones AFSM.

Devonport's Vicki Purnell founded Bridie's Blossoms and Blessings, an organisation that makes handmade care packages for families of stillborn and miscarried babies. Each care package has information on how parents can request a gift or a small keepsake quilt with their baby's name and birthdate on it, as well as a dad hanky. There are around six stillborn babies and 300 miscarriages in Australia each day. I thank Vicki Purnell OAM for shining a light on this heartbreak.

Congratulations also to Devonport's John Phillips OAM, recognised for his services to the finance sector and the sporting community, as well as for supporting those less fortunate in affordable housing. Summing up the view of our region's givers, John said: 'A community is simply about friendships and relationships that you build,' and I think this is a sentiment that encapsulates the electorate of Braddon.

Congratulations to each and every one of our 2022 Australia Day award recipients. We are indeed very proud of you all.

House adjourned at 20:00

BURKE (—) (): Abla Kadous is the New South Wales Senior Australian of the Year for 2022. Hajji Abla has worked in my community for over 35 years. In the year 2000 she established the Islamic Women's Welfare Association in Lakemba, to which she has dedicated herself ever since. She never would have expected that by dedicating all that work to women through a centre in one suburb she would then be given this honour for her whole state. Led by volunteers, the IWWA is a thriving hub of activity and was born out of a need to cater for the growing faith and social needs of Muslim women, particularly from different language groups. They have evolved as the needs of the community have evolved and provide a range of social activities for children all the way through to seniors. They run language classes and even jujitsu classes for teenagers.

Like a lot of organisations, Hajji Abla and IWWA have had to respond to the COVID-19 lockdown that hit our community hard and hit our community with rules that didn't apply to many parts of Sydney. They prepared hot meals and distributed food hampers around the clock, always relying on volunteers. Hajji Abla is an active member of my Watson Women's Network. Her long-term knowledge of my community and perspective is something that I value immensely. I offer my sincere congratulations to Hajji Abla.

Secondly, I want to acknowledge the Lunar New Year. It's now the year of the tiger. For many people in my electorate, particularly people who are of Chinese, Korean or Vietnamese heritage, there's a lot to celebrate this year. As is always the case in my part of Sydney, the invitation from each of those communities is extended to everybody for us all to celebrate together. On Saturday I attended the Korean lunar festival organised by the Korean Society. In Croydon Park I spoke with the Korean consul general, Mr Sangwoo Hong. In the conversation I asked him his sense of the values of the year of the tiger. He went straight to strength and bravery.

Looking back on the last two years I can't think of a more fitting way to describe how my community have been able to find a way forward after being the epicentre of the virus and living through one of the harshest lockdowns in Sydney. There were mounted police on the street. They were told the Army were being called in. Helicopters were flying overhead at night, waking people up. There was a curfew imposed that turns out was not in fact based on health advice. With very little support, small businesses ran down their savings. I was proud of the incredible resilience shown by my community during lockdown and after. They show great strength and bravery moving towards recovery.

Last year I spoke about how local celebrations for the year of the ox would be smaller than in previous years. This year Campsie will be back to hosting the night markets, complete with a lion dance. I wish everybody who is celebrating it a happy and prosperous Lunar New Year.

I said in my maiden speech that your health should not be determined by your postcode. However, in my electorate of Mallee accessing health care continues to be a real challenge due to workforce shortages in primary, specialist and allied health. We are fortunate to have skilled, dedicated professionals providing excellent health care for the communities across Mallee; however, there remain significant barriers.

In Mildura, Monash University provides postgraduate training for medical students who are at various stages of their training elsewhere, but there is currently no pathway from secondary school through to the end of tertiary. This is an issue. Talented secondary students who wish to train in medicine must relocate to Melbourne, Adelaide or another major centre to begin their training, and frequently we then lose them. This profoundly affects our workforce and systematises the maldistribution of the medical workforce. Melbourne has approximately one doctor to 900 patients. In Mallee we have regions where there are thousands of patients for one doctor. It is absolutely untenable.

This is an issue that I have relentlessly advocated for since I stepped into office. I recently invited the Minister for Regional Health, the Hon. Dr David Gillespie, to meet with health leaders across Mallee and discuss this issue, among other challenges of regional healthcare delivery.

I met one junior doctor at Mildura Base Public Hospital, who, after establishing herself in Mildura for three years with her husband—also a doctor—is now moving back to Melbourne to pursue postgraduate ambitions in palliative care. We are not just losing one doctor; we are losing two.

We need to build and preserve our medical workforce in our regions. We lose some of our best and brightest students because we don't yet have a streamlined undergraduate-to-postgraduate training program. We need a closed pipeline of medical training from secondary to tertiary completion.

I've worked extensively in my first three years in office with the universities and the five federal ministers responsible for health and education—Ministers Hunt, Gillespie, Coulton, Tehan and Tudge—to secure an undergraduate biomedical course with wet lab at La Trobe University in Mildura. This is a vital first step to the bigger picture of making Mildura an independent, tri-state health precinct with end-to-end undergraduate and postgraduate medical degrees.

One of the major wins in this term of coalition government has been the implementation of the HELP debt relief for doctors and nurse practitioners who stay and work— (Time expired)

Unfortunately, I have to rise again in the House to defend the property rights of the people of Horsley Park, Cecil Park and Mount Vernon—people whose property rights have been ripped up by the New South Wales Liberal government. There have been updates since I last addressed the House on this matter. There has been a tiny step forward. The government has made further changes to this unfair SEPP, and they have announced: 'To ensure fair and reasonable consideration of requests for subdivision prior to commencement of the aerotropolis SEPP, subdivisions applied for prior to the commencement of the aerotropolis SEPP on 1 October 2020 are to be permitted with consent.' So, if you've applied, you'll be allowed to, but all those people who planned to subdivide their land—in many cases, for many decades, as part of their estate planning for their children—still have their rights ripped up by this Liberal and National Party government in New South Wales. This isn't good enough, and I will continue to speak up for these people and I will continue to point out that they are not being listened to by their state government. The state government claims to have 'listened to the community', but the consultation process ran from 8 October to 5 November, so there was less than a month to put in a submission. That is not listening to the community.

I've written to the people of Horsley Park, Cecil Park and Mount Vernon, letting them know of these developments and that there has been a tiny step forward. I do continue to encourage these residents to voice their opposition to these ridiculous changes.

There has been another change. I do want to be fair here. There has been a ministerial reshuffle in New South Wales and there is a new minister for planning, and this isn't his fault; he didn't do this. I have written to the new minister for planning, Minister Roberts, encouraging him to revise the changes made by Minister Stokes and to correct this wrong. I say in this House: I've worked very closely with the Mayor of Fairfield, Frank Carbone, to pursue this case. I am happy to work cooperatively with Minister Roberts and with the state member, Tanya Davies, to get this fixed. All I want is to see this fixed. These are people who have worked hard and who have committed no crime other than to plan to perhaps one day subdivide their five acres for their children. These rights have been ripped away for no good reason.

Badgerys Creek airport is as far from these people as Drummoyne and Concord are from Kingsford Smith airport—two highly developed suburbs with high-rises and apartments everywhere—yet the state government thinks it is appropriate to say: 'You can't take your five-acre farm and turn it into two 2½ acre farms, because you're vaguely somewhere in Western Sydney, somewhere near Badgerys Creek airport.' This stinks, and it's got to be fixed! These are people's property rights that have been ripped up retrospectively with no consultation.

Minister Roberts has a chance to fix this. I will work with him to see it fixed, so that these good people can have their rights restored as citizens of Australia and as people who deserve nothing less.

I rise today to give a call-out to the 3,800 grain growing businesses across WA who have produced an extraordinary harvest this year in the 2021-22 season. Over the weekend the Grain Industry Authority of WA produced its final tally for the harvest, 24.09 million tonnes. To put that into context, the previous best harvest in Western Australia was 18.1 million tonnes, in the 2016-17 season. That represents an increase of 25 per cent over the previous best harvest. To put it into further context, even though the east coast of Australia had a very good harvest this year, WA produced 38 per cent of the nation's grain crop.

It was an excellent season across most of the state, although, unfortunately, there were a couple of isolated pockets that didn't fare so well. I just want to mention those. On the south coast, south of the Stirling Range, there was just too much rain, and some crops were washed out and unfortunately didn't perform as well as hoped. But, most heartbreakingly for those growers in the eastern wheatbelt, who have suffered a series of dry seasons and were facing one of their best seasons in living memory, they suffered the heartbreak of a frost in September, which robbed them of much of their potential yield. I have experienced that myself, and it is the most heartbreaking thing in farming.

We've managed to achieve this through the innovation and great work of our farming communities. A couple of innovations include early sowing and dry sowing, to make use of every drop of rain that falls, and weed control, either through chaff carts accumulating weeds in heaps or through seed destructors, which destroy the weed seeds as they come out of the harvester. There are also improved varieties, including GM crops, for which I campaigned for many years prior to coming to this place. Two of those three innovations came from an extraordinary constituent of mine, Ray Harrington. Ray is a farmer at Darkan and has previously won the Edison award for science and innovation—well deserved.

The crop has to go somewhere, and I congratulate the CBH Group on receiving 21.3 million tonnes. To Ben Macnamara, the CEO, and his permanent staff: well done and thank you. And I think they had up to 4,000 casual staff, including my daughter Emma, who worked at the Albany port and got great satisfaction receiving that crop. Well done to all the casual staff. I also say thank you to the truckies who delivered the crop, the machinery dealers and the mechanics who supported the farmers throughout the harvest, and all the communities. There are many small communities across my electorate in which everyone has a connection to the local farming community, and they all made a contribution.

The Liberals are no strangers when it comes to selling off our public assets. But the dodgy deal struck by the New South Wales Liberal government to sell off Botany, Kembla and Newcastle ports is utterly scandalous. Novocastrians haven't forgotten the Liberals' sneaky, dirty deal, which the ACCC has described as anticompetitive and illegal, to prevent the Port of Newcastle from ever developing a container terminal. This week, the New South Wales Liberals revealed that they're up to their old tricks again, trying desperately to shut down any chance of establishing a multipurpose deepwater terminal by calling for the sale of critical port access land at the former BHP steelworks. Make no mistake: this is a deliberate attempt by the New South Wales Liberals to ensure that the development of a container terminal at the port of Newcastle remains economically unviable. This is a concerted effort to block investment, entrench private monopolies and put a brake on regional development and employment in Newcastle.

I want our port and our city to have a strong economic future. I don't want our region to be left stranded without options, to be caught flat-footed as the global economy changes and as demands for innovation and new energy sources become more and more prevalent every day. The container terminal proposal will attract an estimated $1.8 billion of private investment, at no cost to the New South Wales government. That's what they're blocking. The project will generate more than 15,000 direct and indirect jobs, provide cheaper freight costs for importers and exporters across the state, reduce unnecessary road and rail movements in and out of Sydney, and add $1.3 billion to our regional economy and $2.5 billion to the national economy.

But the Liberals aren't interested in creating jobs or bolstering the Hunter's economy. They're more interested in protecting their own jobs while they sell us all down the river. It's not enough for this Prime Minister to come to Newcastle and stand alongside the Port of Newcastle and announce a feasibility study for green hydrogen. He has to stand up to the New South Wales government. Any responsible government would encourage diversification and development of our port, not impose barriers that inhibit job creation and prosperity.

Today I call on the Prime Minister to intervene, to call out the despicable actions of the New South Wales Liberal government and to insist on a level playing field amongst New South Wales ports and access to container trade. Only then can the Port of Newcastle realise its full potential. (Time expired)

Over the duration of the pandemic, I've witnessed extraordinary acts of kindness and generosity by residents of my electorate. At its core, it represents the vibrant spirit of volunteerism, which continues to thrive in our community, despite the difficult and challenging circumstances that have been thrust upon us. I've seen the incredible work of individuals who so often, through their own initiative, go above and beyond to support their neighbours in the time of crisis that we've experienced. Of course, I've also seen the incredible work of local community organisations across the full spectrum of activities, from the major national ones, like Vinnies and the Salvos, to local ones, like our community centres.

Volunteering is the cornerstone of every community. That's why I was delighted that last year, in December, after a brief COVID hiatus the year before, I was able to host my annual North Sydney Community Awards, which I've run every year—except for the last—since my election to parliament. These awards seek to celebrate and acknowledge those incredible individuals and groups whose efforts have contributed to making North Sydney a more compassionate and caring community. Today I'd like to highlight some of the winners of the major prizes at those awards and acknowledge their service.

The North Sydney Citizen of the Year award went to Liz Mackinlay for her dedication, time and involvement in the establishment and continuing governance, as chair, of Mary's House, an organisation which provides such important support to women and children fleeing domestic violence. Liz has contributed her services since 2015 and is an outstanding leader.

The North Sydney Older Person of the Year was awarded to John Hayward. John has made a significant contribution to the Lane Cove 12ft Sailing Skiff Club over many decades, including in 2018, when he demonstrated exemplary leadership when the club was attacked by arsonists.

The North Sydney Young Person of the Year award went to not just one but many of the amazing youth ambassadors of the Sustainable Sports Program, which had its genesis at the Northbridge Football Club and is making a real difference by reducing waste and encouraging environmental practices amongst our young footballers.

The North Sydney Sport Achievement Award was presented to Rory Grace for his significant contribution to Northbridge Football Club, where he has been president for so many years, and the North Sydney Community Group of the Year was given to LifeSource Community Foodcare, who provide food and other basic groceries to people who are disadvantaged, on a pension or just doing it tough. The LifeSource Christian Church, which operates the food bank, does an incredible job, and I was proud to be able to volunteer with them during the pandemic to see that firsthand.

I want to offer my congratulations and my sincerest thanks to all our winners—in fact, 61 of them—and those who nominated them for their work. You are making our community a stronger one. I know all residents are proud of and thankful for the contribution that you're making every day of the year.

As we near the end of this parliament and nine years of coalition governments, it is timely, as we head towards the federal election, to reflect on the government's record. A three-minute statement is not sufficient time to cover every issue, so I will summarise my observations. What is prominent in people's minds is that, over the past nine years, there has been a revolving door of prime ministers, deputy prime ministers, government Senate leaders and ministerial office holders.

This has been a coalition government characterised by dishonesty, disunity, rorts and incompetence, a government wracked by several disgraced ministers who have presided over the $1 billion robodebt debacle, which also cost people's lives; the ongoing crisis in aged care; the deterioration of national health services; and worsening inequality, with the highest 10 per cent of households, by wealth, now owning almost half of all wealth and the lowest 60 per cent owning just 16 per cent.

Australia's education outcomes have markedly fallen compared with other countries.

On climate change, Australia now ranks near the bottom of 61 countries on the global performance index. Australia has the second-highest level of biodiversity deterioration in the world.

Then there is the Morrison government's total mismanagement of the NBN rollout. Not only did it nearly double the cost, from $29 billion to well over $50 billion, but NBN speeds are amongst the slowest in the developed world.

The Great Barrier Reef is at serious risk.

Australia's foreign aid contributions are at an all-time low.

The first nuclear submarine—after the government has spent nine years in office and is now into its third proposal—is not likely to be in service for another two decades.

Whilst Australians call for more honesty in government, the Morrison government refuses to have a national integrity commission. But it has stacked the courts and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal with its mates, many of whom are underqualified for the job. In other attempts to avoid scrutiny it has cut $783 million from the ABC and millions from the National Audit Office.

The coalition killed off Australian car making but now pretentiously talks about backing Australian manufacturing.

And at a time when it talks up national security it has presided over the 99-year lease of the Port of Darwin.

The Morrison government has reached its use-by date. It is tired. It has no vision, little credibility and a trillion dollars of debt to its name. It is little wonder that the Morrison government is once again relying on a dishonest national security scare campaign for the upcoming election. We saw that again in question time today. That's because the government has nothing left to run with, and the Australian voters will see through the spin come election time.

It's an honour to speak today about some of the wonderful people from the electorate of Bennelong. I've always been so proud of the vibrant sense of community within Bennelong and the generous and supportive locals who contribute to it. As part of the Australia Day 2022 honours, a number of Bennelong locals were deservingly recognised with awards, and I'm proud to be able to share the achievements of some of them with you now.

Firstly, congratulations to Sally Ruston, from Epping, who was awarded the Member of the Order of Australia for her significant service to primary education and to professional associations. In conjunction with her contribution to teaching she has been involved with the Independent Primary School Heads of Australia, the Association of Independent Schools, the Independent Schools Teacher Accreditation Authority and the Australian Primary Principals Association. Before receiving the Member of the Order of Australia last month, Sally had already received a number of other awards and forms of recognition, including an honorary fellowship of the Teachers Guild of New South Wales, in 2021, and Australian Primary Principal of the Year (Non-Government) at the Educator's Australian Education Awards in 2019.

The next Bennelong local I would like to speak about is Karen Waud, from West Ryde, who received the Medal of the Order of Australia for her service to sport as an administrator and player. Over many years Karen has provided her service and support to a number of sporting associations, such as West Ryde Rovers sports and social clubs, North West Sydney Football and the Eastwood Ryde Netball Association, ERNA. I've had the pleasure of attending many ERNA events and match days. ERNA is a truly great local sporting association, with thousands of members and supporters, which is well managed by Karen, who is the current president. Karen's service to young sportspeople, especially young girls and women, is commendable.

Finally, I offer congratulations to Mervyn Whiting, from Marsfield, on his Medal of the Order of Australia for his service to veterans and their families, and to the community. Over the years, Mervyn has been involved with a number of organisations, including the Returned and Services League of Australia, Freemasons NSW & ACT, the Australian Legion of Ex-Servicemen and Women, and Scouts NSW. Mervyn has also served the community through his professional life as a major in the Australian Intelligence Corps, a soldier with the Royal Australian Infantry Corps, a telephone counsellor on Lifeline, an Australian Federal Police officer and a NSW Ambulance officer. Mervyn, you are a champion!

Again, congratulations, Sally, Karen and Mervyn, on your wonderful achievements. I am so proud of your efforts. You make Bennelong the best electorate in Australia. (Time expired)

Last time I spoke in this chamber it was to wish everyone a merry Christmas. I think we all hoped, after the last two years that we've had, that it was going to be a good summer. Summer is supposed to be a time when Australians get a break, relax and catch up with family and friends—and the Prime Minister promised us that that's what would happen. But this summer was stuffed up for a lot of people in Australia by this government's mistakes. I remember driving around my electorate over summer, looking at the massive, sometimes endless, queues of people lining up in the sun, and in the rain, to get a COVID test. People were forced to stand there for hours. I remember going to my local chemist trying to get a RAT and the chemist just laughing at me. They were almost impossible to find. Instead of being at the beach, a lot of people were forced to drive around from chemist to chemist to chemist—sometimes maybe even from my electorate to yours, Deputy Speaker Wicks—trying to find one of these damn things. If you were lucky enough to get one, then chances were that you had to pay too much for it. Only a couple of weeks ago I got an email from a constituent who said she had bought a RAT online from a major Australian company and the postage fee was 90 bucks—90 bucks! If that is not a rip-off, I don't know what is.

All of this mess meant that people couldn't go to work. Truck drivers couldn't go to work. If truck drivers can't go to work, it means that trucks can't deliver goods. So we ended up with empty shelves in supermarkets. People didn't just have to go from chemist to chemist to chemist; people had to go from Woolies to Coles to Aldi, just to get basic things like meat and fruit and veg. Any of us who do the shopping would have seen the empty shelves. No wonder people have had it with this government. No wonder they're angry. The government talking points use the word 'frustrated'. People are more than frustrated; they're really off this government. These are the sorts of things that shouldn't happen in Australia, and they wouldn't have happened if this Prime Minister and this government had done their job and just ordered enough tests last year. Incompetence has consequences. It didn't just stuff up people's summers; in a lot of aged-care centres, older Aussies have been locked in their rooms, not being showered, not being changed, not being properly cared for. They're being neglected because staff are off crook. I got a call from someone last week telling me that her mum fell out of her chair at an aged-care centre a few weeks ago. There was no-one there who witnessed it. She had a stroke on the floor of the aged-care centre, was rushed to hospital and, two weeks ago, died. We used to call these places nursing homes, because they had nurses in them. That's not the case anymore.

The arts and creative organisations across Melbourne are some of the most vibrant and diverse in Australia. Just look at some of the amazing major theatre productions in my home town, including Moulin Rouge,Harry Potter and the Cursed Child and the highly anticipated Hamilton only a few weeks away. We also have myriad excellent smaller productions and shows that are not to be missed. As the member for Higgins, I've helped advocate for some of the very best local artists, businesses and organisations in the arts sector, who are now weathering the economic storm of the COVID-19 pandemic thanks to unprecedented support from the Morrison government. I am also proud to have called for a national inquiry into the arts as part of the Standing Committee on Communications and the Arts. I look forward to the minister's response to our Sculpting a national cultural plan, including our recommendation to develop a national cultural plan to assess the medium- and long-term impact of COVID on the sector.

Last month federal arts minister Paul Fletcher came to Higgins and met some of the organisations benefiting from grants from the highly competitive federal government Restart Investment to Sustain and Expand Fund—the RISE Fund—and the popular Live Music Australia grants. We met with the owner of popular nightclub Chasers, Martha Tsamis, and her team and learnt how they'll utilise the $36,000 in federal funding under the Live Music Australia program. This grant is supporting them with the installation of audio upgrades and staff training in sound and lighting to produce an even better experience for their loyal clientele. Chasers is actually a popular destination for Higgins's thriving LGBTIQA+ community, as it showcases the very best of the best from the award-winning RuPaul's Drag Race franchise phenomenon. I can't wait to pay Chasers a visit soon when some of the queens sashay into this fierce nightclub.

Chasers joins other local clubs, artists and organisations in Higgins that have benefited from funding under additional federal government support to help kickstart the creative economy post COVID. The total package of federal government support for the arts sector stands at over $970 million in extra funding in response to the pandemic. This is on top of an annual investment of around $750 million in core funding in 2020-21 and on top of more than $730 million provided by JobKeeper and the $119 million provided by cashflow payments. This funding has been critical and timely as it has enabled our businesses to continue to operate during this unprecedented and unpredictable period of severe disruption.

Finally, I would like to state that I am very proud of the fact that the federal government is following on from a recommendation of the arts review report and has committed to an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural precinct, Ngurra, which will be built on the shores of Lake Burley Griffin in the Parliamentary Triangle on Ngunawal country in Canberra. This is a fantastic outcome for our Indigenous arts cultural precinct.

In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded.

I rise today to pay tribute to Michael Beahan AM, the 19th President of the Australian Senate. Michael Beahan was a true Labor man and a great Australian. His story is one to which so many of us can relate in some way. Like a third of Australians, Michael was a migrant, coming to Australia as a 16-year-old, and he worked at a factory manufacturing electrical equipment. He got an apprenticeship as an electrician and established his own small business. In his late 20s, Michael went back to study as a mature student. He obtained an arts degree and an education degree from the University of Western Australia and became a secondary school teacher. It was this combination of factory-floor background, trade qualification and teacher education that led Mike Beahan to become WA Trades and Labour Council's first ever education officer and later the Trade Union Training Authority's Western Australian director.

In 1981, Beahan became WA Labor's state secretary. He led Labor's successful win from opposition to government at the 1983 state election and then won again in 1986. He also led the WA campaign for the 1983 federal election, again winning government from opposition and turning the erstwhile blue seats of Canning, Moore, Perth, Stirling and Tangney a deep shade of red. Perth has remained a Labor-held seat ever since under the stewardship of that great hockey player and champion Ric Charlesworth, another great hockey player Stephen Smith, Alannah MacTiernan, Tim Hammond and the incumbent, Patrick Gorman. 1983 was also the year in which Wendy Fatin was first elected to parliament as the member for Canning. Wendy, of course, then became the first member for Brand when the seat of Brand was created in 1984. Michael Beahan also led the WA Labor campaign in the 1984 federal election, at which not a single newly won Labor seat was lost to the Liberals. Nor were any WA Labor seats lost in the 1987 federal election, when Beahan was not only state secretary but also elected as a senator for Western Australia.

Michael Beahan's principal legacy during his time as state secretary was the modernisation of WA Labor's campaigning infrastructure, practice and culture. He brought new techniques and a new approach to campaigning. Beahan saw the value of modern campaign technology, from imagery to lines and themes—things that all of us here in this place would know now as common tools in the campaign arsenal. In the 1980s they were new and innovative. Michael Beahan championed campaign innovation and training and ensured that those who followed him would be best placed to steward the Labor Party forward.

Much will be said of Beahan's time in parliament as a senator. Unsurprisingly, he became a leader within the parliamentary party and of the Senate itself. Among Michael's lasting legacies is the art collection of the parliament and the acquisition program that he was responsible for creating. When he arrived in this parliament there was little art from Western Australia, Queensland or the NT and no urban Aboriginal art at all. This has changed. Now the corridors and our offices see art from everywhere in the nation, including art by many emerging artists. When I was first elected in 2016, I was very keen to see what was hidden in the basement of the parliament, where the collection is carefully stored. It is a wonderful treasure trove, and I thank the curator for facilitating a tour a number of years ago. It's a very great honour and a privilege for each of us to be able to select art for our office walls. Members and senators get to see a trolley load of art. Those who look after this collection come and see us in our offices and offer us these great gifts to mind for a while, and we should be very grateful for them. That is all thanks to Michael Beahan.

I often reflect in this place on how interrelated we all are, particularly in politics. I never met Michael Beahan, nor worked with him within the movement, but his successor as WA Labor state secretary was Stephen Smith, with whom I worked at the Perth USAsia Centre at UWA. From what I understand, Beahan, like Smith, was a big fan of Paul Keating's prime ministership. Moreover, Michael Beahan used his influence within the ALP to ensure the election of Gary Gray as national secretary from 1993 to 2000. Gary was, of course, my predecessor as the member for Brand and remains a valued political mentor to me and many members in this place—and now is also the Australian Ambassador to Ireland, based in Dublin, and I hope he is well.

So there is no doubt I owe my presence in this chamber today in no small way to this man whose life we are commemorating in this condolence motion. It is an honour to stand on the shoulders of giants like Michael Beahan. I express my sincere condolences to his family and loved ones; I hope your memories of Michael provide you solace and comfort in these challenging and sad times.

Yesterday I had the chance to speak very briefly about Michael Beahan's extraordinary life, in the House, and I appreciate the opportunity again here—among, in particular, some of my Western Australian colleagues—to speak about a wonderful man who made such a wonderful contribution. He was a dear friend to me. He was kind. He was generous. He was gentle. He was very generous with his time in offering advice to me as a new MP, particularly and throughout the last couple of years.

Kindness and generosity are not usually associated with politicians, Deputy Speaker, as you know, but Michael was nonetheless known for his kindness, and he was no less effective for his gentle nature and his kindness. He actually left a formidable legacy of service to the Australian community and to the Labor Party that he loved so much. He served as Western Australia's state secretary of the ALP, and during that period he put in a number of processes. In fact, I think he was instrumental, really, in ensuring electoral victory in Western Australia during those years. He then served as a Labor senator for WA from 1987 to 1996 and as President of the Senate from 1994 to 1996, during the Keating Labor government. We can all see, in the corridor here at Parliament House, his portrait when we walk past. After parliament, though, he remained deeply committed to the Labor Party and deeply committed to working for others and for his community. He was a very strong advocate for the role of neighbourhood houses in local communities, for health services and many other local social justice projects.

As I said, he was one of those really, genuinely lovely people who grace this planet from time to time and whom the rest of us, frankly, have the good fortune to know and to befriend. He was a very good politician and a very good public servant in the truest sense of those words. He was a good man. He was never about his ego; he was always about helping others.

But I'm just one of the many, many lives he has enriched, and many members of the local Brunswick Labor branch, which he was a member of, and the wider Wills electorate Labor family have met and spent a lot of time with Michael over the years, lucky enough to share in his wisdom and his passion for social justice. I reached out to them and asked to hear their stories about Michael. Here are just a few. I quote first his friend Michael Petit in Brunswick, who says: 'When Caroline and I first came to Australia 40 years ago, we both read a wonderful book, a now treasured book, A Fortunate Life by Albert Facey—a life lived honestly, humbly, and a sense of purpose and concerned beyond self. That was Michael. He was a Western Australian of the highest principles and character and he was our friend and good mate. I'm not going to comment extensively about Michael's stellar political career. He was a true believer, and that was made clear from the top down. But what I will comment on is his friendship, characteristics that made him a person you just wanted to spend more time with. I never met a man more generous with his time and devoted to making life better for all around him. He was a skilled speaker and advocate for causes, but also a ready listener to other voices. In short, he was somewhat of a national treasure. His death a few weekends ago was tragic for all of us and his friends.'

Michael Petit goes on to say: 'But you are never really gone when you live in the hearts and memories of so many.' He also says: 'I will revise the Facey book title to say, 'Vale Michael Beahan AM, a most significant life' and he would insist that we now toast one another with a really good shiraz.'

This from Malcolm Harding: 'I can't say that I knew Michael that well, but we did work together for a time when for his sins he managed to have himself appointed to the role of chair of the Celtic Club's disciplinary committee.' That must've been quite a job, disciplining Celts! 'I'm a barrister and I was appointed as adviser to this committee. Michael was given the gig, I suspect, due to his expertise in dealing with fractious behaviour. Michael brought a quiet calm to a querulous situation. He was hellbent on being fair and being seen to be fair, despite provocation.'

His good friend Ann Taylor said that 3½ years ago Michael was a board member of Merri Health and it was coming up to time to renew his position. But instead of running again, he said he wanted 'a good woman to stand'. He approached Ann, and Ann tells me this in and of itself was a huge honour. But he was also not the sort of person to handball anything and just let it go. He worked hard to mentor Ann and supported her through the election. Ann recalls that Michael was always there when she needed him. And she remembers he had one of those oodle dogs, named Millie, and boy did she adore Michael, as we all did. No-one was allowed to disturb their time together on the couch! He loved that dog, and I'm sure Millie will miss him too.

Mark Higginbotham, former mayor of Moreland, had this to say: 'Michael always had a lot to contribute. He made Brunswick his home and loved being a part of the Brunswick community. I will remember Michael as a very inclusive individual. He gave encouragement to women, to multicultural groups, was passionate on Indigenous affairs and LGBTIQ+ issues. Anything, you name it, Michael was a part of it. He was a true believer. He was truly admired and loved by all at the Brunswick branch.'

It's clear that he will leave a legacy that will endure for those of us who were fortunate to know him and, much broader than that, for the community that he impacted. I again extend my condolences to his partner, Margaret, his children, Daniel and Kate, his stepchildren, Georgia and Michael, and their families. I will very much miss Michael and the times that we spent together talking and the advice that he gave me and his insight and wisdom. He was a special person. Vale, Michael Beahan.

Today I join with other members in recognising the contribution of an Australian Labor Party stalwart, Michael Beahan—I was going to say he was a Western Australian stalwart, but it's clear from all of the contributions that he is loved across the party and across the states. I start by acknowledging Michael's family: his wife, Margaret; his children, Daniel and Kate; his stepchildren, Georgia and Michael; and his grandchildren. I'd also like to acknowledge Michael's brother, Terry, a long-serving member of the Joondalup branch in Western Australian. Terry still attends branch meetings and volunteers to elect Labor governments wherever he can. I know this is very sad news for the Joondalup branch, and for Terry and friends in particular.

Like Michael, my career path into this building included sometimes serving as the state secretary of the WA branch of the Australian Labor Party, something that Stephen Smith and Chris Evans also had the privilege to do. And like Michael, I was proud to help deliver WA Labor electoral success. But Michael's challenge when he started as state secretary was that the Western Australian Labor Party had won just one of the previous eight state elections. He turned that around. He elected a solid long-term state government and at the same time made a huge contribution to the election and re-election of the Hawke government. In that office, which has moved around a few times over the years, there still remain reminders of Michael's time in that role, as well as of the party machine that he helped build and of the electoral success that he helped deliver.

He came to that role having had a life that was as diverse as the policy interests which he pursued in this place. He was born in London on 21 January 1937. He migrated to Perth in 1954 with his parents and three of his four brothers. He worked as an apprentice, an electrical fitter and then as an electrician for 10 years. Following quite a tragic car accident, he retrained as a teacher. While teaching in Bunbury, he became active in politics, becoming a member of the great Bunbury branch of the Australian Labor Party. The Bunbury branch is still a powerhouse of the Australian Labor Party in Western Australia. He was elected president of his local branch and grew its membership, through legitimate means—which was how we did things back in the day—from 30 members to 150.

He really inspired people to the cause of Labor. He worked as an education officer in the union movement and served as the state secretary of WA Labor, then the Australian Labor Party WA branch, from 1981 to 1987. He was a strong advocate of the rights of rank-and-file members. That wasn't something that he just believed in to get himself to one position or another; it was something that continued throughout his entire time as an active member of the Labor Party, in Western Australia, in this building and in Victoria. He believed that our policy was better and stronger where it had been developed in consultation and in partnership with party members and the trade union movement.

That consultative and collaborative approach is probably why, when he entered the Senate in 1987, he became heavily engaged in the committee system. In his work on the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, he supported the full disclosure of all political donations. He believed that was vital to the integrity of the political process. In other committees he advocated for stronger regulation and to ensure a more level playing field for small investors, and, earning the respect of his colleagues, he was elected in 1994 as the 19th President of the Senate, serving until 1996.

As others have said, he was at times critical of the Senate, and he had long memories of the Senate's role in the events of 1975. But his experience overcame those criticisms and that scepticism, to where he eventually said, 'Much useful work is done in scrutinising and critically appraising the decisions and activities of government,' as he backed in the important work of the Senate committee system. Recognising also that they were there to do work, not to play dress-ups, he was influential in the Senate advocating for the removal of wigs and gowns.

After leaving politics he married his second wife, Margaret, and together they moved to Victoria. He remained active in a number of roles, including with the Pharmacy Guild, continuing his passion for making sure that people have access to health care and health services. In 2011 he was appointed, rightly, as a Member of the Order of Australia for service to the Parliament of Australia as well as service to the promotion of international bipartisan political debate, to the pharmacy profession and to the community.

He was, as we've heard in speeches by the member for Wills and the member for Brand—and I'm sure we'll hear this from the member for Burt—so much more than that. As I mentioned before, in the WA Labor offices there are many things that remind party members of the time that he ran the party organisation. Similarly, through the art collection in this building, there are many things that remind us of Michael's time in this place. As he said in his valedictory speech:

I was very pleased … with the support of the Speaker and others, I was able to introduce the art acquisition program to redress an imbalance that was created by the budget cuts … There was almost no Western Australian art, very little Queensland art, no urban Aboriginal art, and very little Northern Territory art.

Every day that we wander through this building we can be reminded of the broad, diverse impact that Michael Beahan had not just on the building but also on the fabric of Australia. Vale, Michael Beahan.

I rise to pay tribute to former Senator Michael Eamon Beahan AM. He was a former sparky, unionist and state secretary of the Australian Labor Party in Western Australia, and, notably, he was a former senator, pivotal in ensuring the WA branch of the Labor Party won government in 1983 and was re-elected in 1986. He played a role in the successful federal campaigns in 1983, 1984 and 1987.

When he entered federal parliament as a senator for Western Australia during the Hawke-Keating era he made it clear in his first speech to the Senate that he was concerned with getting things done, and that he did. He was committed to parliamentary committee work and worked to modernise the parliament in the role of Senate President. He took on the almighty challenge of lifting the standards of question time in the Senate, recognising that the televising of question time had a significant impact on the public perception of the work of the parliament overall.

As a good adopted Western Australian, Senator Beahan advocated for our state. One of the most memorable was the recognition that the parliament reflected almost no Western Australian history and art, as well as Queensland, Northern Territory or urban Aboriginal art. Rightfully now, the portrait of him in this building plays tribute to his work in establishing an art collection that is more reflective of our federation.

Senator Beahan played an important role in the modernisation of the Western Australian Labor Party and the Australian Labor Party nationally, and that cannot be overemphasised. That contributed greatly to its electability through the 1980s and 1990s. Of course, his contribution helped make our parliament what it is today. I extend my deep condolences to all of his family. Vale, Michael Beahan.

I just want to acknowledge the previous contributors. Being from WA they have an excellent understanding of the impact and legacy of Michael Beahan. But of course, as honourable members have heard, he came from the UK. He had Irish parentage. He made his way to Perth, as many fine Australians have over the decades, including some friends of mine who I served with in the Australian Defence Force, including some of those who defended Darwin. So many great Australians have made that trip across the oceans and have made our country better. Michael Beahan certainly made this parliament and the body politic in our nation better.

Being a sparky, he brought life experience to his work in this place. In manufacturing, getting an apprenticeship and working as an electrician obviously gave him an excellent understanding of what working people were doing in their lives every day. He was in an East Perth factory.

Also in Perth he did some compulsory military service—three months full-time and two years part-time service with the 13th Field Squadron of the Royal Australian Engineers. I know exactly where he served. During my time in the forces I served with the 13th Brigade. In fact, a good mate of mine was the OC of the 13th Field Squadron. It is a great outfit with a great history. I didn't know that about Michael Beahan's history. He would have learnt a lot there.

He decided to go back to study. Like some of my colleagues, he had a great education. In Michael's case it was arts and education at the University of Western Australia. From the education he received at the time he became a teacher. As he became more involved in the unions he represented teachers. Having had the experience of being not only a sparky but a teacher, he was well placed to become the state secretary of the Western Australian Branch of the Labor Party. It was great to hear a former state secretary of the Western Australian Branch talk about Michael Beahan. I won't go over a lot of that material, but I did want to focus on another thing about him and his time in this place that I think is very important. With some defence experience, he would've made great contributions to the foreign affairs, defence and trade committees, and also the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Having come from part of the Commonwealth, he would have enjoyed that.

But I just want to focus a little bit on his contribution to the art collection, because it involves people from the Northern Territory as well as WA. I think it's important to note that, nowadays, due to Michael Beahan's insistence, there is a lot of outstanding First Nations art in this building. I've done some research with the good folk down at the collection, and I want to thank them for their assistance. They pointed me to several pieces in the collection that are a direct result of Michael Beahan's insistence that we broaden out the scope of the art here—in particular, to get some representation from WA, the NT and Queensland.

One piece—which I've now got my eye on well and truly and hope to have in my office at some time—is by the artist David Malangi Daymirringu. A Yolngu man born in central Arnhem Land in 1927, he was moved to the Milingimbi mission, until that was bombed in World War II—and we're coming up to the 80th anniversary of those bombings. When I was with NORFORCE, I served with a Daymirringu, Norman, who still serves our nation with NORFORCE today—a proud family, and an awesome artist. It's great to know that that history and his depiction of the Arafura Swamp is in our collection because of Michael Beahan.

Also there are several pieces from the Pintupi people, including one here from Ronnie that won the Alice Springs arts prize in 1988—and I'll provide Hansard with the spelling of his surname, Tjampitjinpa, because I didn't have the opportunity to sit down with Warren Snowdon and work out how to say it properly, so I won't have a go at it. But there are really strong lines in this art piece. As I said, in 1988, the bicentenary year, it won the arts prize in Alice Springs, and that's in our collection, thanks to Michael Beahan.

Another Pintupi artist—and these people are from the Western Desert of Western Australia but they also live in the western areas of the Northern Territory—is Joseph Jurra, an incredible artist. He's had his artwork shown from Papunya to New York, and his work, because of Michael Beahan, is in our collection. Also there's Gloria Petyarre from Central Australia, who, unfortunately, died last year. She created so much amazing art, and, again, because of Michael Beahan, it is within our collection here at Parliament House. I just wanted to flesh a couple of those out. The people who made the design behind this tie that I'm wearing now are from the Simpson Desert, from the Western Desert. Those people's artwork, because of Michael Beahan, now hangs on the walls of our offices and in our collection. It is said about Michael Beahan that he had, politically, great influence beyond his numbers. But I would put it to all honourable members that, particularly through the artwork, he has had significant influence in terms of the artwork and the telling of Australia's stories in this place well beyond his years.

I think Michael Beahan would be happy with modern Labor these days, striving for a better country where there is secure work, good living standards for working people and—as a former sparky and manufacturing guy, a welder—a future made in Australia. Vale Michael Beahan.

Like many people who grew up in Western Australia, as often happens, I first met Michael Beahan on a beach in Bali. I was probably about 14 and my family was having a holiday, as were the Beahans. We met each other there for the first time and had a few dinners together and played with their children. And, as is the way in Bali—and you may know this, Mr Deputy Speaker—many people go there and think, 'I've got to haggle for everything and drive it down to the lowest possible price.' In talking with my mum and dad about that holiday and that trip that we had there, one of the things they remember that stood out about Michael was his insistence in coming to us and saying: 'I've spoken to all of these people who are living here, trying to make a living out of selling us things, and I found out how much they get paid. For heaven's sake, don't haggle. They need a living wage. Pay them a fair price.' That was something that stuck with our family and with me for a while.

When I moved over to Melbourne, we obviously lost touch, drifted apart, but I was really delighted when, much later in life, after being elected as the member for Melbourne, I got an appointment one day in my office to talk about an issue to do with a local neighbourhood house, and who should turn up but Michael Beahan. Having enjoyed a very distinguished career in this place, in the Senate, which didn't overlap with my time, he continued, after moving over to Melbourne, to make enormous contributions to the community, not only in respect of his involvement in Merri Health but also his involvement with Neighbourhood Houses. Neighbourhood Houses, as many members in this place would know, are absolutely critical for binding together communities. We found out, especially during COVID, that that is where the fine-grain work of looking after people and tying together communities is done. Through his involvement with health, and also with Neighbourhood Houses, he continued giving an enormous amount, including to the people who live in Melbourne.

So it's not only on behalf of the Greens that I want to extend my thoughts and condolences to all his family and to all who are missing him, and not only personally, as someone who remembers that time spent on the beach together, but also on behalf of my community for the work that he continued to do that made a big difference to the lives of people in Melbourne. Condolences to his family and to all those who are mourning his passing. Vale Michael Beahan.

I certainly didn't meet Michael Beahan on a beach in Bali. I met him after his parliamentary service had ended, when he was going about the work that the member for Melbourne touched upon in his community, and more broadly in Melbourne. I will return to that in a minute. I think his public life is something that is worth touching upon, as was done in the chamber and has been done here by other speakers.

As someone who came to this country as a migrant, like so many, he built a life for himself as a tradesman and as a teacher and made an extraordinary contribution to my political party—his political party—as reforming state secretary of the Western Australian branch and then in this place as a senator for Western Australia, where he made a very significant contribution in the things he did in his time in the other place, most notably as President. People have touched upon the living imprint of his desire to see this building accurately reflect the country and all of it as it is, not simply to see it frozen in time. I think that's something that all visitors to this place appreciate, and it's something that I do, too, cherishing the notion of this building as something belonging to every Australian.

Michael also made a significant contribution in his committee work and in the way he went about his work as a senator. He was always a strong Labor partisan but went about his work without rancour and in a collaborative spirit. When I met Michael, it was those qualities that were most immediately apparent.

Many people who serve this country and their party in public life are not seen so often in community life after that comes to an end, but I think Michael Beahan must have been as active in that latter stage of his life as at any other time. He made an extraordinary contribution to community, and I echo every sentiment expressed by the member for Melbourne about both the important role of neighbourhood houses and the role that Michael Beahan played in sustaining the great movement that enables neighbourhood houses to do the great work they do in so many communities around my city and around our country.

Michael also continued to serve the party he loved, and which I love. I know that the members of the Brunswick branch in particular, but also Labor members across Melbourne and Victoria as well as back in the west, will be thinking of the extraordinary imprint he had on our movement, knowing that that imprint will endure. It was remarked in the chamber by the Leader of the Labor Party that his very image conveyed kindness. I think that's true. His personal qualities were remarkable, and it is those that I will be thinking of as I also think of his family and all those who loved him and are missing him. Vale, Michael Beahan.

Mr Deputy Speaker, could I add a few words in this motion of condolence for Michael Beahan? I didn't know Michael well, but I was the deputy leader of a delegation to the United States and Canada with him. I think it was in about 1995. He was President of the Senate, so that opened doors that might not ordinarily have been opened, including to the White House to meet with then Vice President Al Gore and to a very memorable meeting with the oldest serving senator in the US Congress, Strom Thurmond. He had a four-star general as his aid, and he passed him a set of notes which we could all read from either side as to what he said to us as members of a visiting delegation.

It was an interesting delegation because of some of the characters on it. They included Mal Colston—who in this place, I suspect, is probably better forgotten than mentioned! Also, Alan Griffiths was a member of that delegation. Despite our differences, which are part of these delegations, we worked very well together, and that was in part because of the leadership of Michael Beahan. He was well informed, he was a gentleman, and he didn't hog the limelight on the delegation but shared around the tasks and the opportunities to say thank you to our various hosts in different parts of the country. We went to Chicago and New York. We went to Columbus, Ohio. You might ask: why Columbus, Ohio? It was because there was a potential US presidential candidate there, the then Governor of Columbus, Ohio, and the embassy thought it was a good opportunity for them to meet the gentleman concerned.

Throughout, Michael was remarkable in the leadership of the delegation that he showed. I met him on and off in this place over the years and bumped into him in a number of places after he left the Senate. He was always friendly and always had very informed commentary about things that were going on. Could I add to the comments, particularly those by his colleagues from the Labor Party, in extending my condolences to his family. May he rest in peace.

I understand it is the wish of honourable members to signify at this stage their respect and sympathy by rising in their places.

Honourable members having stood in their places—

I thank the Federation Chamber.

by leave—I move:

That further proceedings be conducted in the House.

Question agreed to.

The trauma of the stolen generation sits deep, and it doesn't just hurt those who were taken; it also hurts their families and the people who come after them. In my time in this place, I've had the privilege of working with Senator Lidia Thorpe and Senator Dorinda Cox, and one of the things that I have started to learn since being here is the meaning of the term 'intergenerational trauma'. What it means is the pain that was suffered because of the violence and dispossession and the racist policies that saw children being stolen. It didn't just happen once; it happened over and over again, and it happened not just to the children that were taken and their families. The unimaginable grief and trauma that that inflicted got passed down to people who continue to live it. They continue to live it not only because it has been part of their family life but because it continues to happen in too many respects. It continues to happen in many ways in our society now, where we see much higher rates of First Nations children being taken and where we see children being locked up in a system that says that children as young as 10, in some places in this country, can be taken and put in prison. Prison is not a place for children. But that is where we are putting them, and we are doing it disproportionately to First Nations children. Some of the policies have ended, but some of them have continued. First Nations people now, as I am learning day by day, aren't just having to deal with the traumas of the past, which we as white people in this country don't do a very good job of being honest about, but they're having to deal with ongoing trauma being inflicted and reinflicted day after day, including on their children.

When we look back and understand that this country that we call Australia has at its beginning a huge act of violence and dispossession, we've got a lot of truth-telling to do if we are to ever move forward. We can heal at some point, but only if we start by telling the truth, including telling the truth about the violence and dispossession and the racist policies that have inflicted so much trauma. Once we tell the truth, then we can start to heal and reconcile.

Apologies are a critical part of that, which is why the National Apology to the Stolen Generation was such a significant moment and why it's right that we come back in this place to mark it and reflect on it. But apologies have to be fully given. Apologies have to come without conditions if they're to be full apologies. What did our Prime Minister say when it was his turn to come and speak? He said: 'Sorry is not the hardest word to say. The hardest is, "I forgive you".' No, Prime Minister; it is not in your remit to be talking about offering forgiveness. That is something that only those whom injustice has been inflicted upon are in a position to offer. And, in many instances, they're only going to do that when they think there's sincerity and when they think there's been truth and when they think there's been healing. That is why, when this sorry with an asterisk came during this really significant occasion, there was outrage. There was outrage from the First Peoples Assembly of Victoria, who said, 'Get in the bin,' and there was outrage from our senator Lidia Thorpe, who said, 'How dare you ask for forgiveness when you still perpetrate racist policies and systems that continue to steal our babies?'

Stolen generations and their families and survivors do not owe this Prime Minister anything. When the Prime Minister stands and addresses the country, people need to hear that he understands the pain and not that he is somehow suggesting that the next step must be forgiveness. The apology must be unconditional for it to mean anything, but this one came with an asterisk. There is work to do. Forgiveness is something you earn, not demand. We have to start in this country by telling the truth, especially those of us who benefit from the decades of dispossession and violence that have happened, that have come before us. All of us who are not First Nations people benefit from it. It is time that we told the truth about that. We also can do some practical things like have a proper, fully serviced national compensation fund. That is not going to take away the pain but it will go some way to helping people address it and will go some way to acknowledging the pain and suffering. That's what we've been pushing for—a nationally consistent compensation scheme, as well as ensuring that there are the range of services available to provide for the emotional and mental health needs of survivors. It is something that makes sense and something that we will continue to push for. But, when we have a situation where descendants of the stolen generation are twice as likely to have experienced discrimination in the last 12 months, 1.9 times as likely to have experienced violence in the last 12 months and 1.6 times as likely to be in poorer health compared to other First Nations people, we have a responsibility to apologise fully and unconditionally but then to set about a process of action and healing.

To come back to where I started, in this country we do not do a very good job at telling the truth about our history. We see, time after time, governments intent on whitewashing history, saying there are only certain accepted, sanitised, whitewashed versions of the history that can be taught in schools, and anyone who dares ask questions about what happened in our country's history—it's no longer allowed. This government is going to use its position to say that there is only one official, politically correct way of thinking, speaking and learning in our schools. But, so long as we fail to tell the truth, all of us are going to suffer. You can't sweep this under the carpet. You can't sweep history under the carpet, especially because, in too many respects, it's continuing to happen. What we need is a process to tell the truth, and then we can talk about justice, and then we can talk about treaty. Other countries have done this. Other countries have begun the process of telling the truth about the shameful acts that lie in their history, because there is an understanding that it is only by doing that and then by reaching agreements that people are going to be able to move forward together as a country.

As we reflect on the abject shame that is the removal of children from their families, purely on the basis of race, we need to do more than words, and we don't need to offer apologies with asterisks. We need to say, 'This is a moment to heal but to learn from,' because it's only by learning from it and beginning to tell the truth that we're going to be able to fully heal. There is so much promise for this country if we do that. By joining the other countries who have told the truth, who have treaties, who have voices, we all will gain, and that is the optimistic future that lies ahead for this country. But it won't happen if we fail to tell the truth and it won't happen if we give apologies with asterisks.

I rise to speak more from a personal experience, my family. I wasn't going to speak today and then I saw two photos of my little girls. There's nothing in this world that I love more than my two little girls. Astin, three, and Emery, one, are both Aboriginal girls. My wife is Aboriginal. My mother-in-law was born on Palm Island, was a part of the stolen generation, was born in a jail. The trauma that she has lived through her whole life is something that none of us here would ever be able to comprehend, understand. Therefore, I believe that we as a nation find it easier to not talk about it. That's why I decided to come in today and pay homage to my family and my mother-in-law and to say sorry—sorry that this occurred to her and to the thousands and thousands of other families around the country.

My wife's tribe and my mother-in-law's tribe is Djungan and Gungandji, from Mount Mulligan, from the Tablelands. They're rainforest Aboriginals. I want my daughters in five years, 10 years, 20 years—however long I sit in this place—to know that their dad stood up and spoke. It's a weird feeling for me because, outside of veterans affairs' issues and my family, I'm not an emotional person. But, in thinking about the horrors that occurred well before my time, it just takes the oxygen out of me. It winds me that this happened to Australian people. It winds me that my beautiful wife had to deal with the trauma that followed and the systemic racism that followed. It pains me that, unless we stand together, my daughters will go through the same thing. It might sound like a selfish thing to say, but I'm being about as open and honest as I can ever be. When it becomes real to you and you feel it in your bones, it drives people into action.

Fifty years ago my mother-in-law was at the Aboriginal Embassy, out the front of Old Parliament House. Fifty years ago a young Florence Burns, protesting, standing there, fighting and putting her hand up to be counted, was arrested by the police. Florence is someone that I've often asked questions of around Australia Day, around the different awards that I've received. I brought Florence here for my maiden speech, where she hugged Ken Wyatt and she hugged the Prime Minister. I think she was hugging everyone that day. I've never seen so much pride in her. That was because she felt that she has a voice in here, through her daughter, through me, through her grandkids, who I'm sure in a couple weeks will be asking, 'When's granny coming down from Cairns?' I'm sure my wife will enjoy having a bit of time to relax, as my kids are a handful. I'm sure Josh over there understands all about that! I know that my mother-in-law went straight up to Pat Dodson and gave him a hug.

There's a time when we debate with aggression and there's a time when we debate together, and, with my contribution here, for me this is a debate together. I found it refreshing—but I know the member for Melbourne didn't find it refreshing—to listen to the Prime Minister yesterday and I found it refreshing to listen to the Leader of the Opposition, Anthony Albanese. He's someone that I've spoken to before about Aboriginal issues as well as veterans issues.

When I served, I served with lots of First Nations people, whether they were Torres Strait Islanders or Aboriginal people from lands all around the country. I just saw them as brothers, really. I fought with them in wars and when I was injured they looked after me; I didn't see anything more in it. But when I met my wife, I started to look deeper into the Defence veterans brotherhood to ask: what did they go through when they were growing up? What did their parents have to endure? I think it's the responsibility of all of us to acknowledge the atrocities that have occurred and to create a better future for our First Nations people—for all people—and to walk hand in hand. That's something that I've had to learn through my journey as a young man and it's something that I would like to instil in others. I hope that people who dial in from the electorate of Herbert, places like Townsville, will say, 'Yes, I get it.'

This is about us acknowledging the atrocities that should never have happened. I'm sorry for that and I hope that we can now work together for a better future, because I want my daughters to grow up learning about and understanding the bad that has happened in our world. But then they must know that they can think, 'I can do anything.' I want my daughters to sit in parliament, if they so choose, with other strong women from around the country on all political sides who get here through their ability. I want them to look through Hansard and think: 'You know what? Their contribution that day meant something to me.' It means that we will come together with open arms to create a future where this should never happen again.

I'm sorry that this occurred. I will never understand what my mother-in-law and people throughout this country, including the people of Palm Island, which is in my electorate, went through. I will never comprehend it, but what I promise to do is to listen, to learn and to ensure that we as a nation never do this again. I want a very bright future for my two Aboriginal girls when they go through school. As they grow up I want them not to have go through the things that my wife went through. I know that standing up and talking about it, regardless of your political party, changes how our future will be. I'm very, very confident that with the strong people in our parliament, especially the strong young women in our parliament and the Aboriginal people in our parliament, we will guide this nation, regardless of the political divide, towards a better future for our First Nations people.

I begin by noting that I'm speaking today on Ngunawal and Ngambri country and I pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging. Thank you to the member for Herbert for his very personal contribution. It was a very important personal contribution, as were all the personal contributions to this anniversary debate. These contributions really highlight that it is important that this parliament continues to mark the historic apology Prime Minister Kevin Rudd delivered, because the effects of the policies and the practices of the stolen generations reverberate down generations. That's why that apology made 14 years ago needed to be made. It was a very special day in this place. I wasn't here then, but I've heard from so many people about the emotion involved in it. It took so much courage for people who've been so wronged to come to this parliament—this institution that had failed them so profoundly—and the members of the stolen generations came here to Parliament House to witness that apology.

It was an apology that was a long time coming and it was promised to them after years of rejection and resistance. I believe it was a unifying moment, and for many it is one that will never be forgotten. I think it says a lot about the priorities of a Labor government, of former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, that it was the first order of business of his new government. On that day, Prime Minister Rudd said:

We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians.

And it must be said that we can't look to our future without reflecting on and being honest about the past. Until we acknowledge the full weight of our history, the full truth of our history, we will always be burdened by it. It is important that the wrongs be acknowledged, that we learn from them, and that we look and seek for the ways of healing.

Until last year, this anniversary was also the time when we assessed the Closing the Gap report in this parliament, the annual report that still catalogues the unacceptable chasms that divide Indigenous and non-indigenous people in Australia. And those chasms are a reminder that speeches do not always lead to action. They can just be words if we don't all commit to actions that do better.

The historic speech to the stolen generations will always hold its special place in our national story. But it should hold a special place as the start of a new chapter, not as the end of a chapter. The next chapter must be about the Uluru Statement from the Heart. I actually feel very proud as an Australian that we have been given the Uluru Statement from the Heart, that it has been generously presented to us, that Indigenous people are saying to us, 'Here, take it—we can go further as a nation.' We should feel the generosity of that request for us to take it up and the possibility of the requests that are in that statement: voice, truth, treaty. Labor is committed to all three, to the voice to parliament, enshrined in our constitution; to truth, without which we really can't walk forward together as a nation; and to treaty, emerging from a makarrata commission, which Labor will establish.

Truth can be confronting. But truth does not have to lead to conflict. Truth-telling could and should be seen as a step in finding grounds for the healing that allows this country to write that next chapter, to write a better chapter. We should come to the process of truth-telling not as if we're approaching a battle but as if we are open to exploring the terrible things that happened, to acknowledging those and to finding a way forward.

The apology that was given in this place was incredibly important in helping us to confront a painful past and to bring us to the end of one journey and now hopefully to the beginning of another one. It is important that we acknowledge this anniversary. It is even more important that we acknowledge that the work is not done and that we get on with delivering the Uluru Statement from the Heart.

I too would like to start my contribution by acknowledging that we stand today on the traditional lands of the Ngunawal and the Ngambri peoples and that, in my community, our land is the land of the Bunurong people of the Kulin nation. I want to particularly acknowledge everyone in my community who is a member of the stolen generations or has family members that were members of the stolen generations, and everyone at Nairm Marr Djambana, the gathering place by the bay, which is our local Indigenous community centre.

On 13 February 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd delivered the apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples. In that apology, Prime Minister Rudd said:

The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia's history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future.

Prime Minister Rudd apologised for the laws and policies that had inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these, our fellow Australians, especially for the removal of children. And the consequences of policies and laws of successive governments, of stripping people of culture and family and history for so long and of stripping them of country, mean that the grief, suffering and loss continues. The gap, on so many measures that are so important, between First Nations Australians and those of us who came here much later is still much closer to a chasm than a crack.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd ended the apology by saying:

A future where all Australians, whatever their origins, are truly equal partners, with equal opportunities and with an equal stake in shaping the next chapter in the history of this great country, Australia.

As my friend the member for Jagajaga said, that next chapter is clear. It is the generous and beautiful Uluru Statement from the Heart. It is delivering voice, delivering truth and delivering treaty. Too often people talk about the Uluru Statement from the Heart without understanding the beauty of what's in it and what it is asking for, so I want to quote the Uluru statement. It states:

We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.

We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.

Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.

We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making between governments and First Nations and truth-telling about our history.

In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

That trek that started in 2017 is still going. It has faced some barriers, and I am sure there will be more barriers to come. I make this pledge: I accept that generous invitation to walk in a movement of the Australian people for a better future, side by side with our First Nations brothers and sisters. The Labor Party accept that generous invitation and will do everything in our power to bring to bear voice, truth and treaty and the better future that will come with it.

I begin by acknowledging the Ngunawal and Ngambri people and pay my respects to their elders past, present and emerging. I also pay my respects to the Wajuk and Pinjarup people of the Nyungar nation on whose traditional lands my electorate of Brand sits in Western Australia.

I have said before in this place that I feel sad at practically every welcome to country ceremony I attend and at every acknowledgement of country I witness. My response is from a deep sorrow of how painful the British-led occupation of this continent has been for those who have been here for eons. My sadness is born out of regret for what we as newcomers to this land have missed out on by our centuries-old practice of dominating every culture we find, taking whatever we want and dismissing languages, lifestyles and lives we don't care to understand.

Luckily for us newcomers, Indigenous Australians have a millennia-old practice of patience and care for this land. Sixty-five thousand years on this continent is an eternity for human purposes. New Australians living off this continent for 230 years is but the blink of an eye in relation to that endless time line, but those short 230 years have devastated Indigenous Australia. Nonetheless, our First Nations sisters and brothers are patient with us and continue to try to share their extraordinary culture, history and knowledge of country with us with good humour and generosity, despite our ignorance and despite how long it has taken us as new Australians to understand all that we have missed out on.

After so much trauma and hurt, after so many years of being told no, and after a hard-fought election campaign in which Kevin Rudd committed to saying those two simple words that carry so much meaning, 'I'm sorry', the national apology was a solemn moment of national healing. And, for anyone in the electorate of Brand, I'm really pleased to be able to provide to anyone who asks an official copy of the national apology that Kevin Rudd issued in 2008.

Some people may have noticed a photo I keep in my office. It was taken on the day of the apology. To be honest, I don't know how I came to have this photo. I just don't know. It's got no acknowledgment of the photographer who took it or of the women who are in it. I'm going to describe it for the House. It is a photo of four Indigenous women standing in the forecourt of the parliament. Two of them have T-shirts that say 'sorry', and two of them have T-shirts that say 'thanks': sorry, sorry, thanks, thanks. They are arm in arm, leaning into one another. I think it's one of the most remarkable photos of our time, and that's why I keep it with me, on my desk at work. It sums up how important it is to say sorry, and, equally, the generosity of our Indigenous sisters and brothers that they can so easily say thanks for what shouldn't have been as hard as it was. So, if anyone knows who took this photo or knows the women in it, I would be most grateful if they got in touch, because I would really like to get another copy of it. It's an amazing piece of Australian history.

Now, just as faith without works is dead, so is an apology without a change in behaviour. Australia on that day in 2008 resolved to change to make things better for our First Nations communities. Fourteen years later, there's just as much work as ever to be done—hard work, policy work, cultural work; discussion, consultation, inclusion. Not enough progress has been made to close the gap. The Closing the Gap project has been disappointing, not least because of its slow progress. But falling short of our goals should not mean abandoning them or celebrating mediocrity. No, it means that we strive on, borne forward by our shared commitment to being better than we were before.

On this side of the House, the Labor Party is committed to the Uluru Statement from the Heart. Paul Keating said in Redfern in 1992:

… there is nothing to fear or to lose in the recognition of historical truth, or the extension of social justice, or the deepening of Australian social democracy to include indigenous Australians.

There is everything to gain.

There is everything to gain in listening to Indigenous Australia, working with them and adopting in our hearts and our Constitution the Uluru Statement from the Heart.

This year marks 55 years since the successful 1967 referendum, which sought to ensure that First Nations Australians are included in our community. It marks 30 years since the historic Mabo decision of the High Court, which reversed a 220-year-old legal fiction that sought to obliterate more than 60,000 years of Indigenous land custodianship. It marks five years since the Uluru Statement from the Heart was shared with us. I sincerely thank and honour our Indigenous sisters and brothers and other leaders who have supported these just causes. Now it is time to share this burden across the country. Now is the time for us in this place to show leadership and to ensure that truth is heard, that voices are heard, that rights are enshrined and that reconciliation is real.

I acknowledge the Ngunawal and Ngambri people, who are the custodians of this land, and I also honour the Darug people of the Eora nation. Representing an area that was known as the 'blacks town', I am always mindful that we have the highest urban Indigenous population in Blacktown in New South Wales, if not in all of Australia. I particularly want to thank my office manager, Nicole Duffy, a proud Wiradjuri woman, who wrote this speech for me. Her late father, Phillip Duffy, was a Vietnam veteran. He was also a very high-profile policeman in Riverstone, and he passed away during COVID in 2020. He did not get the send-off that he deserved, but he is honoured by his dear daughter Nicole and their family every day.

On 13 February 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd issued an apology to the stolen generation by moving a motion in the House of Representatives. This finally and formally acknowledged the wrongs that were inflicted on First Nations people. However, prior to this historic apology, the Hon. Paul Keating spoke of the horror and torment inflicted on First Nations people, in his famous Redfern address in 1992. His words were both stirring and emotional, particularly when he said:

It begins, I think, with that act of recognition.

Recognition that it was we who did the dispossessing.

We took the traditional lands and smashed the traditional way of life.

We brought the diseases. The alcohol.

We committed the murders.

We took the children from their mothers.

We practised discrimination and exclusion.

It was our ignorance and our prejudice.

And our failure to imagine these things being done to us.

With some noble exceptions, we failed to make the most basic human response and enter into their hearts and minds.

We failed to ask—how would I feel if this were done to me?

The forced removal of children from their families saw a profound impact on First Nations children and families that is still felt today. Families were broken, communities were shattered and a proud people were left with missing pieces to their family trees. Many of these missing pieces will never be recovered. The children who were forcibly removed suffered a loss of identity. They were robbed of their connection to country, their kin and their language. Horrifically, many children who were institutionalised often suffered unspeakable physical, mental and sexual abuse. The physical scars may heal with time, but the psychological damage is still being felt across the generations.

Kevin Rudd's motion meant that, for the first time, a government had acknowledged and apologised for the hideous atrocities inflicted on our First Nations people. He went on to say:

We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians.

Those words were echoed through the chamber and over the live streamed videos across the country. I must say too that I remember being a lawyer at the time, at Gilbert + Tobin. Danny Gilbert, who continues to this day to be a champion of First Nations justice and reconciliation and recognition, gathered the entire firm into our main meeting place. He didn't force anyone to be there, but everyone wanted to be there for this historic moment. I want to honour Danny Gilbert for the efforts that he makes. As he has said, we must deliver for First Nations people; we must deliver voice, treaty and truth. I thank Danny and the partners at Gilbert + Tobin, in particular, for their leadership and for being on this journey for so long.

The raw, heartfelt grief and sadness was met with hope—a hope that we, as a nation, learnt the gravity of these policies and vowed that it would never happen again. Archie Roach summed up what many of the survivors went through in his song 'Took the Children Away'. He sang of the pain of being ripped from his parents' arms, being separated from his siblings, losing connection to his country, kin and language and being raised white while being black. As I stand here today, it's hard to imagine how a government legislated to remove children and shatter families simply because of the colour of their skin. This is something that took place until quite recently in our history.

The apology was brought about following the Bringing them home report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, which was instigated by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Fifty-four recommendations came out of the report, and today many of these recommendations remain unfulfilled. One of the key recommendations of the report was reparation, which should include the following: an acknowledgement of responsibility and an apology from all Australian parliaments, police forces, churches and other non-government agencies which implemented policies of forcible removal; guarantees against repetition; restitution and rehabilitation; and monetary compensation.

In reading this report, it is hard not to feel the despair of so many, in particular a man by the name of Paul. His mother was tricked into putting him into care while she recovered from a serious illness. While she recovered, her son became a ward of the state. She fought for her son to be returned, but her pleas fell on deaf ears. He wrote:

… my Mother never gave up trying to locate me.

She wrote many letters to the State Welfare Authorities, pleading with them to give her son back. Birthday and Christmas cards were sent care of the Welfare Department. All these letters were shelved. The State Welfare Department treated my Mother like dirt, and with utter contempt, as if she never existed.

We must, as a nation, move forward and ensure that the lives that were lost were not in vain. We need a treaty, we need to close the gap and we, as a nation, must learn and heal together. While the apology took place prior to my election to this place, as a member, I too say sorry for the pain many First Nations families still face today as a direct result of the past policies and practices of successive governments.

Today, as we meet in this place, it should be noted that, in November last year, a motion in the Senate to fly the Aboriginal flag in the chamber was defeated. That's a simple, necessary act to move us one step closer to being united and resolute in our stance with this country's First Nations people.

Yesterday, it was 14 years since this historic apology, and, sadly, recent data from the Productivity Commission showed that, up to June last year, up to 22,000 children were living away from their parents and more than 8,000 of these children lived in New South Wales. Fourteen years on, we still have so far to go. If we're serious about history not repeating itself and about reconciliation, we must work together with First Nations communities all over this country. We must acknowledge and accept our part to play and be serious about moving forward.

I acknowledge that this parliament sits on the lands of the Ngunawal and the Ngambri peoples, and I honour the ongoing contributions of all First Nations elders, past and present, that are part of the world's oldest continuing culture, resident here in our nation. We're remembering the apology—that amazing speech given by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. And it was a seminal moment in our nation. I remember it mostly for the impact that it had.

When I saw Kevin come up to Darwin, to Royal Darwin Hospital, there were lots of countrymen out the front, as there often are—lots of First Nations elders who had come in from communities, either for health treatment for themselves or to visit loved ones and support their friends and family. I'd been working with Jose Ramos-Horta, the former President of Timor-Leste, at around the time that he'd survived an assassination attempt, so we'd brought him back to Royal Darwin Hospital. Kevin Rudd, the new Prime Minister, had come up to Darwin to see Jose, and, as we went in the doors of the Royal Darwin Hospital, out the front there were, as I said, those elders, and they just said: 'Thanks, Kevin! Good on you, Kevin!' And it was without fanfare. There were no cameras. It was from the heart, and it was just expressing a bit of relief, a bit of joy and a bit of gratitude that someone had extended that apology on behalf of our nation. And it is something I will never forget. It was beautiful, and it showed that we had heard the apology, as a nation, and that we were proud, as a nation, that it had been done. Of course, we kind of wondered why it had taken that long—what deficiency of humility or of grace had led to such a delay in the extension of that apology. But it was a wonderful, wonderful moment.

As others have done, I might reflect on some personal experiences. In the late seventies, I suppose—I was a young fella; I can't remember the year exactly—or maybe in the early eighties, I had a school friend whose parents had gone to work on an Aboriginal mission in the Wheatbelt of WA, at a little place called Tardun, near Mullewa. So I went over there to visit my friend. I went by plane—I think it was the first time I'd ever been on a plane—from Melbourne over to Perth, and then by road up to this mission. It was my first experience with Aboriginal people over in WA. These kids were amazing sportsmen and sportswomen, or sports boys and girls—they were incredible. And it was a great experience to be out with them on their country. I was at high school in Healesville, in the hills north of Melbourne, which of course is where Coranderrk was. We'd had some Aboriginal kids at St Brigid's Catholic Primary School, but I hadn't really connected. But out on this mission I saw what seemed, I thought at the time, to be working for everyone. Of course, in time, in maturity, you realise that, whilst an education is important, being with your family is incredibly important.

When I moved to the Territory and met so many other members of the stolen generation, I gained a fuller appreciation of the intergenerational trauma and harm caused by separation. That's why the humility with which former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd offered that apology on behalf of the nation was keenly and gratefully accepted, because in the Top End there are lots of people who have had that experience—their families have been taken away. Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs Linda Burney articulated that incredibly well in her speech following the speeches of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in this place.

The member for Barton, the shadow minister for Indigenous affairs, during her speech acknowledged some of the First Nations senators in this place, including Senator Malarndirri McCarthy and Senator Pat Dodson from the Labor Party. She also mentioned former senator Nova Peris, who, when she joined the Senate, was the first First Nations woman elected to our parliament. I had the good fortune to work with Nova for a period, so I can report to the House that postpolitics Nova is doing incredibly well. She has established the Nova Peris Foundation. Of course, she has family connections who were part of the stolen generation. It's very real for people in the Top End. Nova, having established the Nova Peris Foundation, is doing some project work in the Tiwi Islands. The Royal Australian Navy recently had her sponsor NUSHIP Arafura, down in Adelaide, which I think is extremely appropriate. And she can feel very proud that she played a strong role in the campaign to free the Aboriginal flag. Well done, Nova! That's a bit of an update for the House.

So many in the Top End have been touched by this, as I said. What Paul Keating knew to be the power in his speech 30 years ago in Redfern is the power of truth in our reconciliation journey. I hope that following the Uluru Statement from the Heart we are able to implement voice, treaty and truth. We will have the opportunity to bring about further healing through practical action, in health and housing in particular.

When Kevin Rudd delivered the apology, people got to know Lorna Fejo, who's the mum of a good friend of mine, Richie Fejo, and others. A couple of years ago, when Lorna had a significant birthday, we lined up a call so that Kevin could wish Lorna Fejo a happy birthday. It was a beautiful moment. Back in 2008, when Kevin delivered the apology, he said to Lorna, 'Do I call you "Auntie"?' She said, 'No; you can call me by my skin name, Kevin: "Nanna Nungala".' Lorna Nanna Nungala Fejo is unwell at the moment. We send you our love and appreciation, and the respect of this House.

I want to begin by acknowledging the Ngunawal and Ngambri people, on whose land this parliament stands, and that the electorate of Canberra is their land. I want to acknowledge our Minister for Indigenous Australians, Ken Wyatt, our shadow minister for Indigenous affairs, Linda Burney, Senator Patrick Dodson, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, Senator Jacqui Lambie, Senator Lidia Thorpe and Senator Dorinda Cox. I also want to acknowledge today any members of my community who were members of the stolen generation or whose families were members of the stolen generation.

Fourteen years ago Prime Minister Kevin Rudd formally apologised to the stolen generations on behalf of the Australian government. It was an important and long-overdue moment in our nation's history. Like millions of Australians, I clearly remember the feeling of that day and the importance of that moment that so many had fought for and worked towards over many, many years. It was to be not the end but the beginning of a new chapter, looking to a future where we are honest about our history and come to terms with it as a nation. At the time, Prime Minister Rudd said:

For the future we take heart; resolving that this new page in the history of our great continent can now be written.

We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians.

A future where this Parliament resolves that the injustices of the past must never, never happen again.

A future where we harness the determination of all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement and economic opportunity.

A future where we embrace the possibility of new solutions to enduring problems where old approaches have failed.

A future based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility.

A future where all Australians, whatever their origins, are truly equal partners, with equal opportunities and with an equal stake in shaping the next chapter in the history of this great country, Australia.

The apology was a significant step towards reconciliation, and it's time we had the courage to continue that journey. That is why the Australian Labor Party is committed to implementing the Uluru Statement from the Heart in full. It has been almost five years since Australia's First Nations peoples called for voice, treaty, truth, and it is clear that these should be our next steps. It's why we must confront the truth that we continue to fail First Nations peoples. Today, First Nations peoples have a shorter life expectancy, the highest rates of incarceration in the world, lower levels of education—and, still, too many First Nations children are being removed from their families.

My friend and colleague Linda Burney, the member for Barton, speaking about the impact of the apology yesterday, asked Australians to use our imaginations, to envision what life is like in remote communities during the pandemic. She said:

Imagine what living in a remote community is like, with 15 or 20 people in a three-bedroom house. What that's like? Imagine not having enough RATs to go around when local services are failing because there aren't any staff to step up when those on the front line have to isolate, and when less than half of the community is vaccinated. Every day, I hold my breath and hope, because that failure could mean the end for far too many who carry our culture and language. Our elders are our libraries. They are our internet. They cannot be replaced.

I am so proud to work with Linda in our party and to work with her in our First Nations caucus committee and I am so proud that she is leading our policy platform for First Nations peoples. We have to ask ourselves: would these issues persist if the voices of First Nations people were heard by this parliament in the way they have asked them to be? Self-determination is a vital step towards reconciliation, and it is one that Labor is fully committed to. We are the only party that is fully committed to this. I'm proud that Labor is committed to this.

Labor will establish a makarrata commission as a matter of priority and enshrine it in the Constitution with a First Nations voice to parliament. Labor will also expand justice re-investment, establish consolidated real-time reporting of First Nations deaths in custody at a national level and double the number of Indigenous rangers. These are the next steps that Labor will take, that Australia must take.

The Uluru Statement from the Heart was an incredibly generous gift from First Nations people to Australia, and it called for those three key things—voice, treaty, truth. Voice: an Indigenous voice to our parliament, enshrined in the Constitution, advising our nation's legislators on matters affecting First Nations communities. Treaty: Australia is the only Commonwealth nation that is yet to sign treaties with First Nations people. Treaties are an essential step in acknowledging and giving legal effect to the rights and interests of First Nations Australians. And truth: a comprehensive process of truth-telling about the true history of this nation, once marred by dispossession, conflict and genocide, one which acknowledges the truth strength and resilience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Labor is fully committed to the implementation of these things.

I want to finish my speech today by reading into the Hansard once again the incredibly moving words of the Uluru statement. It is important that we remember these words and the wishes of First Nations people when we have these debates.

Our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tribes were the first sovereign Nations of the Australian continent and its adjacent islands, and possessed it under our own laws and customs. This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according to the common law from 'time immemorial', and according to science more than 60,000 years ago.

This sovereignty is a spiritual notion: the ancestral tie between the land, or 'mother nature', and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were born therefrom, remain attached thereto, and must one day return thither to be united with our ancestors. This link is the basis of the ownership of the soil, or better, of sovereignty. It has never been ceded or extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown.

How could it be otherwise? That peoples possessed a land for sixty millennia and this sacred link disappears from world history in merely the last two hundred years?

With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia's nationhood.

Proportionally, we are the most incarcerated people on the planet. We are not an innately criminal people. Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates. This cannot be because we have no love for them. And our youth languish in detention in obscene numbers. They should be our hope for the future.

These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the torment of our powerlessness.

We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.

We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.

Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.

We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making between governments and First Nations and truth-telling about our history.

In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

This statement came from the most comprehensive deliberative process of First Nations peoples in Australia ever undertaken. This is what they have asked of their parliament. How could we not accept this generous gift and walk together into a better future? Voice, treaty and truth—this is what we need for healing. This is the next step in reconciliation. I am so proud that a Labor government would do this, and I look forward to our parliament doing this, hopefully in the next term.

I too begin by acknowledging the Ngunawal and Ngambri peoples, the traditional owners of the land on which this parliament meets. I acknowledge the Indigenous members of this place: the member for Hasluck, the Minister for Indigenous Australians; the member for Barton; Senator Dodson; Senator McCarthy; Senator Thorpe; Senator Lambie; and Senator Cox. It seems unimaginable now that it was only a few years ago that we didn't have members of the Indigenous community here in this place. We've made extraordinary changes in such a short period of time and we all wonder why it didn't happen earlier. I extend that acknowledgment to the Wadawurrung and Dja Dja Wurrung peoples, the traditional custodians of the land that my electorate of Ballarat falls within.

Fourteen years ago this week the parliament finally said sorry to the stolen generations. I remember that day very well. I was heavily pregnant with my son Ryan, who's now 13 years of age. It was an incredibly unifying and proud moment for the nation, and I hope very much that, once he emerges from his slightly grumpy teenager years where he's not really that interested in what his mum does, he looks back and reads the Hansard. He might be in his late 30s, maybe his 40s or even his 50s when he's doing the family history—and I'm long gone—and he might think, 'It's pretty amazing that I was in my mum's womb when that amazing moment happened.'

Fourteen years ago we said sorry for the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on our fellow Australians. We said sorry for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country, and the ongoing harm it has done for generations. We said sorry on behalf of all Australians. It was, as I said, one of the proudest days in parliament and I believe one of the best days of this parliament. It was an example of what the parliament of this country is capable of when we have compassion in our hearts and unity in our heads. Today I again acknowledge those families, those communities and those histories torn apart by historic injustice. Just because those acts happened a long time ago doesn't mean that the damage does not linger or do harm throughout generations.

I particularly want to recognise those who came here that day to accept our apology. They came to this place with a grace that was perhaps more than we all deserved. Like many regions around Australia, Ballarat cannot escape the history of the stolen generations. Nazareth babies homes, Ballarat babies homes, Ballarat Orphanage, St Joey's—all housed children of the stolen generations. Children from as far away as Gippsland were taken from their homes, stolen from their families and their culture, to be raised in our home town of Ballarat. Ahead of my contribution to the apology debate 14 years ago, I learned some of this history by reading Faded Footprints: Walking the Past, produced by the Ballarat and District Aboriginal Cooperative. This book told the story of Uncle Murray, who was here on that day. He was taken from his family in Gippsland. As he said:

By the time my auntie realised we were gone, we were in Melbourne.

He was later separated from his two sisters and put in what he described as a cell.

When you are 10 years old and you've never been shut in and you go into a dark room and the door is shut on you—well, 60 years later I can still hear that rotten door shutting.

The book also tells the story of Karen Atkinson, who spent 10 years at Ballarat Orphanage, which I later worked for. Karen's mother died three weeks before she left the orphanage, and she never saw her again.

Dianne Clarke remembered this:

So they bailed us up there and took the parents, like dragged them off, kicking and screaming, around to our window and they were fighting. Our parents were putting up a good fight. Our mum was real little but was fired up and was fighting for her kids and I remember seeing the police just giving it to her, just punching her on the ground.

That is the love of a mother up against the institutions of the state. At the apology 14 years ago, Prime Minister Rudd asked us to do one thing: imagine if that were you. In the years since that apology, I have had a child of my own, and the thought of him being taken is just unimaginable. These are just three stories, and there are countless stories like them that come from around this nation.

According to the Bringing them home report, between one in three and one in 10 Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families between 1910 and 1970. They were placed in institutions and church missions, were adopted or fostered and were at risk of physical and sexual abuse. Many never received wages for their labour, and welfare officers failed in their duty to protect Indigenous wards from abuse. They're not in the distant past. Survivors of the stolen generation live amongst us today, as do their children and their children's children. They were removed from their families solely on the basis of their race.

It was fitting that the apology was the first act of the Rudd government, because Australia as a nation faces no more important task than reconciliation. That apology 14 years ago did not solve the problems. It was neither the beginning nor the end of the road towards reconciliation; it was merely a step along the way. It was a process that started a century ago, continuing through William Cooper, the granting of citizenship in the 1967 referendum, the tent embassy, the Barunga Statement, the deaths in custody royal commission, Mabo, the Redfern statement and Bringing them home.

After the apology there remains more to do. As Prime Minister Rudd said:

We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians.

We now need to renew the work of laying claim to that future. The apology led to the Closing the Gap process, an important process, but we know that First Nations people are still far more likely to be jailed, to die by suicide and to have their children removed than non-Indigenous Australians. Between 2013 and 2019 the rate at which those children have been placed with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander carers actually fell from 53.6 per cent to 43.8 per cent. Out of the 17 targets that have been set, only three were on track. Speaking on the most recent Closing the Gap statement, the Leader of the Opposition said:

… we are surrounded by unfinished business. Even worse, we are surrounded by business that hasn't even been started.

This 14th anniversary should be a moment to reflect and a moment to move forward. We're now coming up to the fifth anniversary of the Uluru Statement from the Heart—what the Leader of the Opposition rightly described as 'a patiently extended hand, waiting for us to take it and to go further as a nation'.

I remember at the time of the apology 14 years ago there were people, including people who are still in this place today, who felt that making that apology was somehow going to take our nation backwards. They still believed that on that day 14 years ago. The reality is that the world didn't fall apart. Nothing changed other than as a nation for the first time we were actually unified in the grief that had been caused by our institutions and we made a pledge together to move forward. I think many of us saw how incredibly powerful this parliament can be when it does that and really want to see that continue.

The Uluru statement is based on three things: voice, truth and treaty. They are three words that can guide our way forward as a nation. I know there are people who are nervous about that. There are people in this place who are nervous and have made some statements around some of those things. Again I say that nothing is worth doing if it isn't hard and if it isn't something that can unify the country in a way that treaty, truth and voice can—a voice to our parliament enshrined in our Constitution; truth about our past, without which we can never have reconciliation; and a treaty emerging from the makarrata commission, which an Albanese Labor government will establish. As the shadow minister I believe these are not radical propositions; they are a culmination of a century-long journey. I am proud that Labor supports this statement in full. The government needs to do so as well.

The Prime Minister promised a voice to parliament, and we have yet to see that delivered. This journey started long before Aboriginal people were even counted as citizens and it is a journey that has endured over long years of hardship and setbacks. They are incredibly patient. They should not have to wait longer. We know what the next step on the journey is, because they have told us. We need to listen to our First Nations peoples. We need to listen to the Uluru statement. We need to take that next step together. Fourteen years is a long time to wait. Fourteen years, hopefully, will not be in vain.

I rise as well to address the chamber to acknowledge the 14th anniversary of the National Apology to the Stolen Generations. I'd like to knowledge the Ngunawal and Ngambri people, whose land we meet on for every parliamentary sitting and on which we are meeting today. I'm proud to acknowledge the traditional owners of my own electorate, the Wurundjeri people of the Kulin nations. I pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging. I'm also incredibly proud to pay homage to William Cooper, after whom my electorate is named. He was a First Nations man born in 1860 who fought for the rights and advancements of Aboriginal people—and the fight continues.

The national apology was a watershed moment in Australian history. It recognised the deep and brutal trauma of those from the stolen generation who'd been taken from their families. As the member for Barton so movingly put it yesterday, put yourself in the shoes of a three-year-old who is wrapped in the love of a large family and then has that love ripped away. It recognised the immense pain and it met that raw wound with a sincere apology. Our nation failed people. Australia enacted a cruel brutality upon too many of our First Nations peoples. Finally our national leader said sorry. I'd like to quote from the speech made 14 years ago by our Prime Minister:

For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.

To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.

And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.

It was an extremely meaningful moment for so many of us, for so many Australians. The apology tore through an insidious and long-term silence about these acts of horror and violence. The whole nation paused and reflected. We thought of those who hadn't been given a platform to tell their story. We thought of the intergenerational trauma that ripped across families, across communities and across cultures. We thought of the loss of language, the loss of culture, the loss of identity and the loss of family that people endured and still, painfully, endure today. For Australians who do not have First Nations heritage, we confronted the dark side of our nation's history and grappled with the truth that each of us, or our families, may have contributed to this mistreatment, or indeed held silence surrounding these issues.

I remember where I was 14 years ago when the then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, delivered the apology. I was on the lawns of parliament with my nursing colleagues from the Congress of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nurses and Midwives. I can't tell you what an honour it was to stand there and share that day, that moment, with those wonderful women. And I do remember, not so proudly, that we all turned our backs on the then Leader of the Opposition, Brendan Nelson, who referred to alcoholism, corruption and abuse. That was offensive. That was wrong. It did not hold the tenor of that auspicious moment.

The Prime Minister's speech aimed to move Australia forward. It was a turning point in history. Words are powerful, and actions are even more powerful. That's why Labor is so committed to delivering the Uluru Statement from the Heart in full. This commitment is underscored by three important words and all the values and empowerment that sit within them: voice, treaty, truth. My electorate of Cooper is home to many First Nations Australians. We have many amazing First Nations organisations that are domiciled in Cooper. Within them, there are so many individuals who embody strength, resilience and leadership. There is also anger—anger at persistent racism, anger at the gap that still has not been closed and anger at the many ways that colonialism continues to play out in the lives and experiences of First Nations Australians.

Apologies are important, listening is important and actions are even more important. But demanding forgiveness after an apology is unforgivable. An apology must be given not with an expectation of forgiveness but with sincere remorse and the promise of addressing the injustice. You don't say sorry because you expect to be forgiven. You say sorry to truly apologise. An apology is not a transaction. You can't set the terms of an apology. It should never demand the forgiveness of those who are wronged.

I've had many people reach out in the past day furious that one Prime Minister could say something so offensive in the context of another Prime Minister's authentic apology. The PM has shown a growing or maybe even an ingrained pattern of telling victims and survivors how they should behave, what they should say, whether or not they should smile and, now, when they should forgive. He says that 'I forgive you' are the three hardest words to say, but I believe the hardest three words for those opposite to say are 'voice, treaty, truth'. This is the greatest piece of unfinished business for this parliament and for Australia.

I want to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which this parliament meets, the Ngunawal and Ngambri people. As the member for Chifley, I'm proud to represent people who either hail from or live on Dharug land, and I want to acknowledge and pay my respects to elders past and present there. It gives me enormous pride—and it is an enormous honour—to represent, within the electorate of Chifley, one of the largest urban based Aboriginal communities in the country. It's something that I wear as a badge of honour, and I take very seriously, beyond just making that reference, the need for us to do things to help every step of the way.

The apology means something to a lot of people in our area, because they were members of stolen generations. I sat with a lump in my throat listening, in particular, to one story about a brother and sister who were taken away from their folks. They thought, for some reason, that their parents were deficient, and they never got to see their parents. Their parents worked multiple jobs just so that they could earn money to send to those kids. The money never made it to those kids, and those kids thought that their parents didn't love them. It was only after their parents died that these kids, who grew up to become adults, learned the true story. They now carry around, like a stone, the guilt that they feel about their parents. It's pretty tough. There's no better way to tell a person they mean nothing—and I mean nothing—than to put a number on them: to take away their name, to take away who they are, to stop them speaking their language, to stop them celebrating their culture and to disconnect them from the land. And that's what we did.

The apology is really important. As was said a number of times yesterday, it's not about making people feel guilty; it's about asking people to do what we ask people to do every single day—to understand what has happened to us, to appreciate it, to walk in our shoes for a bit. There's an elder in my neck of the woods, Uncle Greg Simms, who, whenever he does an acknowledgement of country, says, 'Before you take your next step, remember the ones who took the steps before you.' I think that is a good thing, just for living life.

So the apology is important. Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made it because, for years, we had a Prime Minister who believed it was just empty symbolism and wouldn't do it. There was this whole thing about 'practical reconciliation'. But you can do both things. Symbolism matters, because, if it doesn't—with the greatest respect, Deputy Speaker Coulton—why are you sitting down? Why are you elevated before us? Why do we have flags? Why am I speaking from here? Why don't I sit down and deliver this speech? All these things—verbal, nonverbal and otherwise—mean something. Symbolism is a big deal for us; it's a big deal for others. So we should do both the symbolism plus the thing of making a difference. The reason I mention this is that, right now in my community—one of the biggest communities, I stress—we have an Aboriginal medical service that's not run by the local Aboriginal community. It's hit the wall; it's entered administration.

Order! It being 6.30 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 192(b). The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an the order for the next day of sitting. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed on a future date.

The controversy around Novak Djokovic's visa brought to light again a much greater tragedy, one that unfortunately has not received nearly enough attention. Djokovic was detained in Melbourne's Park Hotel alongside more than 30 refugees and asylum seekers who have been locked in there, in some cases, for more than a year. Among the men held there, there are refugees who have been in detention for almost a decade. Think about it for a minute: forced to stay for almost a year, locked up. You cannot leave the hotel and you have very little access to fresh air. It sounds anything but ideal. This is like a permanent state of quarantine and lockdown for these people, and those of us who have done some quarantine remember how hard that was. For the refugees in detention in Australia, whether in a hotel or any other detention centre, onshore or offshore, there is no end date. For those of us who did lockdown and had to self-isolate et cetera, there was an end date. The refugees came looking for safety and found themselves in indefinite detention. We may have stopped the boats and people arriving from offshore to Australia under treacherous conditions, but we cannot forget that there were real people on those boats.

This government is only concerned with instilling in the Australian public fear about asylum seekers. That's what we see time and time again. The Prime Minister even went so far as to deny that the men held at the Melbourne hotel were genuine refugees. He instead accused them, on 2GB radio, of simply not wanting to return to their home countries. This was just plain wrong. Reports suggest, in fact, that there are 25 refugees and seven asylum seekers currently held in the Park Hotel. Let's be clear: some form of administrative detention for people without valid visas is common around the world, and no-one is advocating for an open slather approach. But it should be designed to be temporary, while a person's application is being assessed.

Evidence from around the world shows that Australia is unique in its policy of indefinite detention. For example, on average, people are detained for 48 days in the US and 24 in Canada, while 90 per cent of those in the UK's immigration system are held for less than six months. As of September 2021, Australia's own average is almost two years—689 days. I'm not sure if that's a record that we can be proud of.

Detention was never meant to be indefinite. In fact, indefinite arbitrary detention is a violation of international human rights laws. These people have not conducted themselves as, or been found to be, criminals. No court has found them guilty of committing wrongdoing or harm to someone else. The effects on these men, women and children in indefinite detention can't be ignored.

Since 2013, more than 3,000 asylum seekers and refugees have been transferred to offshore detention, and the government has done this, again, without a clear plan, without a clear end date. As a result, some people have found themselves in detention for almost a decade, where they have suffered abuse, inhumane treatment, and medical neglect in many circumstances. In this time, 12 people have died in Australia's offshore detention system, including from murder, medical neglect and suicide, not to mention the long-term costs to people's mental health. And, again, it appears the government has no plan or solution for these people.

Adults should be detained for the shortest time necessary. As I said earlier, no-one is advocating for open slather; there have to be processes and there has to be a system whereby people come to this country. But adults should not be detained indefinitely, and children should not be placed in immigration detention at all. We're talking about children. Many of us in this room have had children. Think of your children as five-year-olds, two-year-olds or seven-year-olds being detained in a detention centre. It is absolutely abhorrent.

The annual cost of detaining a single asylum seeker in PNG or Nauru is around $3.4 million. But the cost is just one side of this argument. It's ultimately the human toll that should concern us all. For a long time I've called for more humane treatment of refugees here in Australia. For example, on this side we've supported the use of community detention, where appropriate, while people are having their applications finalised. That is both more humane and more cost-effective.

That is something that became very evident to those Australians who followed the case of the Murugappans—Priya, Nades and their Australian-born daughters, Kopika and Tharnicaa—the Tamil family in Biloela. We all would have seen them on the news on our TVs. They had lived happily in the Queensland town of Biloela for four years. They were welcomed in the community. The community wanted them to stay. They were part of the community. They'd contributed to the town through their work. And they'd made many, many friends in the community. This is why there was such an outcry from the people of that town when the family, after having their application for asylum rejected, were removed from their home and detained on Christmas Island. There's been a strong and vocal campaign by the people of Biloela to have the family returned to their home.

This campaign, and the family's plight, touched many around the nation. The family was separated after the youngest daughter was evacuated from Christmas Island to receive urgent medical treatment in Perth. Australians watched in disbelief as the government initially refused to reunite the family. The outcry was so great that Minister Hawke finally granted the family a three-month bridging visa so that they could live in community detention in Perth, close to their other daughter. The family has now won a court challenge against the immigration minister's decision that effectively barred them from reapplying for bridging visas. All family members, excluding Tharnicaa, have now been granted bridging visas until December 2022. In this case, community support is exceptionally strong for this family to be returned to live in the community they love and which has welcomed them so warmly. The immigration minister could ensure this happens with the stroke of a pen, if he chose to do so.

But what this case illustrates is that Australians—when they are able to see and understand the people behind the headlines—understand the need for greater compassion. They also understand the need for alternative solutions to indefinite detention. For example, this government should take advantage of other countries' offers to resettle these people. We, on this side, have long called for the Australian government to accept New Zealand's repeated offers to take some of these refugees, yet the government continues to refuse. I believe we must work towards ending indefinite detention and finding long-term domestic and regional solutions.

The Djokovic case has exposed the treatment of refugees in Australia for the world to see. The attention from national and international media gave these refugees some hope. It's our job now to ensure that they are treated fairly and humanely.

It is possible to have strong borders while still actively working towards a more humane, long-term regional solution. Australia is a compassionate nation. Australians have welcomed migrants and refugees, throughout the 200 years of white settlement, from all over the world. We can look at the Chinese students after the Tiananmen Square massacres: we gave those who were here as students, and others, the ability to stay. We have welcomed people from Kosovo, from Bosnia—from all over the world, when there have been tragic situations taking place. Migration and refugees are part of this country. That's what has made us the wonderful country that we are. We should stop using these people as political footballs—because that's all we're doing: we're using human lives as political footballs to score political points. And it's wrong.

I recall one of the most embarrassing moments I've ever had in my life, talking politics with the mayor of Athens. I had a meeting with him in 2012, I think it was, and he asked me about the issues and problems we were having with refugees and boat arrivals. He asked me this question: 'How many have arrived by boat, not authorised, in your country?' At the time I think it was around 6,000, and I said to him, 'Approximately 6,000 or 6½ thousand,' and he roared with laughter. He said to me: 'And you call that a problem, 6,000 in a country of less than 20 million'—at the time—'in a continent the size of Australia? We have 500,000 unauthorised people here in Athens alone and we still haven't made the fuss you are making over in Australia.' That's the proof in the pudding that, as a nation that respects human rights, we should adhere to those human rights and we should be a more humane government and nation on these issues.

For me, coming to this parliament was about two things. It was about service to our community and delivering for our community. I have to say that most of us are in here not just as elected representatives of our communities but also as people whose homes are in those communities that we seek to serve. That's why politics has a fundamental attraction for me. In fact, before I was elected to this place, I had the honour of serving at the local government level, where I was able to serve our community most directly. But I also saw how strong our community in the lower North Shore was through my involvement in many community organisations, be it Rotary, the Crows Nest Centre, local school councils or others.

So I'm proud as someone who has been part of the lower North Shore community for over 20 years now that, during my five or six years as a member of this place, we as a federal government have been able to achieve so much to support what I happen to think—I'm a little bit biased—is one of the most incredible parts of Australia and certainly Sydney. And I want to reflect on some of those achievements tonight, because the achievements span the full range of community activities in North Sydney. I want to start with some of those essential services which are so important to our community. I'm proud of the fact that, under this coalition government, we have seen an increase in services in areas like health, with, for example, funding for the Royal North Shore Hospital, and health care on the North Shore at record levels. I'm proud of the fact that we've seen increased funding flowing to aged care. I'm proud of the support that we've been able to provide to our schools, both government and non-government.

But I'm also particularly proud, in an area of Sydney that is passionate about our local environment, of what we've been able to achieve in relation to protecting some of our magnificent harbour foreshore. One of the projects that I've been most involved in has been the work of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust at the two sites that lie within my electorate. At the Woolwich Dock, we've seen increased funding to support its ongoing restoration. At Sub Base Platypus, the old submarine base, we are in the final stages of creating what is such a magnificent community facility. It is not often that you have the opportunity to create new open spaces, new parks and new community facilities around our crowded harbour foreshore, and that's what this government has been able to achieve. Soon, construction will begin, with support from this government, of what will be the final but probably most significant part of its rehabilitation as a community site, and that will come with the demolition of the old torpedo factory and the creation of even more parkland. The harbour foreshore is a precious part of our local community not only because of its intrinsic environmental values but because of the opportunity to create more recreational space.

We are a community that is seeing a growing population, but also a change in the population. We are seeing, more and more, younger families moving to our area, and that has put pressure on many of our existing recreational facilities, particularly our sporting facilities. So a big focus of my work as the member for North Sydney has been to make sure that, to the extent the federal government can, we are supporting an increase in the capacity of our local sporting facilities, and that's been reflected in some of the projects that I've successfully fought for. We've been able to support the Lane Cove Council to rebuild the outdoor pool at Lane Cove, and I saw this just a week or so ago when I visited the Lane Cove Swim Club. The pool was at risk of falling into Pottery Green below it and needed to be completely rebuilt. I am very proud of the work that we're doing at the moment to support North Sydney Council to rebuild the North Sydney Olympic Pool, a pool that has a national profile. It's one of the most beautiful pools in our country. Again, it faces major structural issues, with a grandstand that has been there since the Empire Games were held there—they were actually the catalyst for its construction—and a pool shell which was cracking and leaking water into Sydney Harbour at an alarming rate. Through the $10 million we're providing, that pool is now being rebuilt in a way that will serve future generations.

But they don't stop there. We've seen projects, including in my first term, to make Gore Hill Oval one of the best AFL facilities in Sydney and recognised as such by the AFL. We've seen major works at Thomson Park to create better amenities for the uses of that oval. We've seen funding provided to allow better facilities at Boronia Park, at the western end of my electorate. We are seeing projects developed by councils that will be supported by the federal government to improve facilities at Tunks Park. We've seen work in Lane Cove at Tantallon Oval—such an important facility—with a new facility for players and viewers of sporting activities being constructed there as well with federal support.

But I'm also proud of the fact that we are providing support for a number of game-changing projects which will improve the amenity of some of our densely populated areas, and I particularly think of Willoughby City Council's project in Chatswood, to revitalise some of the parts of the Chatswood CBD. In Spring Place, over $1 million of federal funding will support a major revitalisation there.

I'm also very proud of the support that we've been able to give to community groups large and small. At the large end of the spectrum, the Dougherty Community Centre in Chatswood—a major community facility—is going through a major upgrade, with around $1 million of federal support allowing that to occur.

What I've particularly welcomed is the fact that we've been able to get federal funding for some of the small community organisations. I think, for example, of the Scouts. Many of our local Scouts halls have been reinvigorated with the support of federal funding. I've also seen that work extend to other organisations, like some of our local bowling clubs.

I'm also proud of the fact that we've been able to provide support to those community organisations as they make sure that they're playing their part in meeting our national goal of reaching net zero emissions by 2050, and those small grants are making a difference. I've seen projects that have allowed those small organisations to put solar panels on their roofs. I've seen grants that are allowing them to deploy more energy-efficient infrastructure. Just recently I was at the wonderful Giant Steps school, which supports autistic children, and saw what they're doing there to improve their energy efficiency with some of our grants. At the other end of the electorate are the wonderful people at the Greenway public housing complex, with funding to allow their major community kitchen to operate more efficiently. These are all tangible ways in which individual community groups are able to contribute to lowering our national emissions.

I also wanted to talk about an area that is particularly close to my heart, and that is the arts. We have a wonderful arts community in North Sydney. It's a very vibrant one, with theatres, music groups, art galleries and so on. I am very proud of the fact that we've been able to provide funding to some of those organisations. I think, for example, of the magnificent Ensemble Theatre. In fact, the grant that I helped secure to get solar panels on their roofs was I think the very first government grant, state or federal, that the Ensemble Theatre ever received. I think also of some of the grants that we've been able to get for organisations like the Lane Cove Youth Orchestra, such a magnificent orchestra extending the reach of music into the hearts and minds of young people in our district.

Finally, through many of our programs we've been able to directly support those providing volunteer services to community groups. They can be the small grants that go to organisations like Rotary, Scouts and others, but they can also be the bigger grants that come through the Stronger Communities Program, which is making a meaningful difference for many of those volunteer based organisations.

Of course, our region has many other problems, and transport is the most obvious one of those. As someone who is passionate about the role of public transport in our cities, I want to talk about the fact that our government has been able to provide $1.7 billion towards the Metro project, which is going to so dramatically increase the opportunities for residents to use our rail network. Of course, that $1.7 billion goes to a project that extends from Bankstown to Chatswood, but for our area it will mean new stations in places like Crows Nest and North Sydney, increasing access—a couple of minutes to Barangaroo, a couple more to Martin Place or other parts of the city. That of itself not only is going to provide easier access for residents but also is going to help maintain and revitalise the role of centres like North Sydney, Chatswood and Crows Nest, in a very positive way.

These are all important contributions that this government and I have been able to make to support our local community. I'm very proud of those achievements and, if I have the great honour of being re-elected, they will continue to be my focus.

I'm proud to represent an electorate that is amongst the most multicultural in this country. Sixty-thousand of the people who live in the Oxley electorate were born overseas, and we have the highest number of people with Vietnamese heritage anywhere in Queensland. The very best of cultures from every corner of the globe come together to make our community great.

Later this month we will mark International Mother Language Day, a day to highlight the importance of cultural and linguistic diversity and remember the role they play in building sustainable societies. Across my electorate we celebrate many languages: Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Tongan, Hindi, Bengali, Tamil, Greek and Italian—to name just a few. By preserving their mother languages, the people in my community are fostering peace and respect and passing down their proud and rich family histories to their children. We are creating a society where differences in culture and language are celebrated as important and irreplaceable parts of the fabric of Australian life.

I want to thank members of the community who are doing important work to keep diversity alive, including my friend Dr Jishu Gupta, from the local Bangladeshi community, who works year after year to raise awareness about the loss of mother languages. I'm proud that in my electorate members of the community tell the Australian story in diverse languages, celebrating where they've come from to become part of this country's bright future.

While there is much to celebrate in the electorate of Oxley, I must also use this opportunity in the parliament to express my increasing concern for the aged-care residents I represent. This government's persistent incompetence means that the same mistakes are being repeated again and again. From the initial botched vaccination rollout to the botched booster rollout, we are stuck in a cycle of acting far too late. Thousands of booster clinics were rolled out in aged-care homes across the country, but they didn't vaccinate staff at the same time as they vaccinated residents. This is a shocking missed opportunity indicative of this government's entire response to the pandemic.

Let's not forget the issues that plagued the initial rollout of vaccines in aged care. The deadline to fully vaccinate all residents and staff by Easter 2021 was missed by six months. Vaccine clinics routinely missed residents and did not vaccinate staff. Vaccine clinics were routinely cancelled or delayed. There was no plan by the government to assist workers to get vaccinated outside of work. Now, with boosters, we're seeing similar chaos. The deadline to give boosters to residents by 31 January 2022 was missed and still hasn't been achieved, with up to 60,000 residents still unprotected. Vaccine clinics have been missing residents and not vaccinating staff. There's been no plan to get the boosters into people's arms. The booster mandate for work has been announced months too late despite being recognised as inevitable by providers.

These are mistakes that our aged-care residents simply cannot afford. Frail older Australians have paid an extreme price for the government's incompetence, with prolonged lockdowns, isolation from loved ones and, tragically, over 681 deaths in 2022 alone. That's 681 deaths this year, and we're in the second week of February. Older Australians built this country. They and their families deserve so much better than this. They deserve better than a government whose arrogance prevents them learning from their own mistakes.

We know that mistakes are part of life—everyone makes them—but we must learn from them. We're now entering our third year of a pandemic, and the Prime Minister still stubbornly refuses to learn from his mistakes. He never takes responsibility. The Black Summer bushfires, the vaccine rollout, the booster rollout, rapid antigen tests—all were opportunities for the Prime Minister to step up and show leadership and take responsibility. Yet tonight of all nights, when we should be debating aged care, should be debating RATs, should be debating what we can do to help Australia, what is this government focused on? What is this Prime Minister focused on? Sacking yet another minister of this government, but not telling the minister he's going to be sacked.

How do we know about this? A leak from the government, the third serious leak. We saw criminal leaks from the government last week. This leak is not from the Labor Party; it's not from the opposition. This is from the government's own side. This is from people sitting around the inner sanctum of the Prime Minister, sitting in the cabinet, not worried about how we can deliver rapid antigen tests to Australians in need, not worried about people in aged-care residential facilities, not worrying about securing work, not worrying about being able to see a GP. They are completely and utterly focused on themselves, completely and utterly worried about their own jobs, not worried about the jobs of other Australians.

Well, it is enough. Enough is enough from this government: stop focusing on yourselves, stop talking about yourselves, and start working for the Australian community. We know that this government is interested in only a couple of things in the dying days of this term of parliament: trying to wedge the opposition and trying to run scare campaigns. There's no legislation on the agenda this week, and tonight we're seeing leaks from the government about a hit on another minister, the Minister for Education and Youth. He's been on leave for three months and he was a pretty ordinary minister to start with. This is the same minister who delivered car park rorts, then became the education minister and now is being rolled out of the cabinet again. On it goes and on it goes. It is simply unacceptable.

My community have had a gutful of this government being so completely and utterly focused on themselves that Australians are paying the price for this incompetence. We know that RATs are not available to people who need them. The Prime Minister used one of his favourite excuses and said it's up to the states to source RATs. This is ridiculous. It's absolutely the Prime Minister's responsibility. Labor believes that RATs should be free and accessible for all Australians. PCR tests are free for everyone through Medicare, so why aren't RATs? Nobody should be denied a test because they can't afford one. This is the right approach from a health and economic perspective. The economy doesn't work if people can't go to work, and in the midst of a pandemic many people simply can't go to work if they can't get a test. The government and the Prime Minister were warned about this. They were told that this was going to happen, so the arrogance of this Prime Minister is astounding.

He never listens, never owns up to his mistakes. We know he doesn't hold a hose unless he's shampooing someone's hair. We know that time and time again he's ducking for cover. Now he's ducking for cover because of what his own cabinet ministers, the people who know him best, are saying. I won't even get started on the text messages; we know the current Deputy Prime Minister, when he was not the Deputy Prime Minister, said that the Prime Minister couldn't be trusted. In fact, he said he could never trust him, but we know that the current Deputy Prime Minister, when he came back after knifing the former Deputy Prime Minister, said, 'Well, I didn't really know him that well, and that's why I sent that text.' He didn't deny the text, just said he didn't know him well at the time. That's despite the fact that when he was the Deputy Prime Minister the current Prime Minister was the Treasurer.

Does anyone on the other side of the chamber think about how ridiculous this all sounds, just how stupid the government looks? It is so embarrassing to be a member of parliament when we're seeing this behaviour from members of parliament on the other side, the so-called government—when they're not protesting outside the front of this building with the wack jobs, the anti-vaxxers, or lining up to encourage them while they're protesting outside vaccination clinics. Of course, no-one pulls them into line—freedom of speech, we can't have any of that! This goes to what is wrong with this government. They are completely and utterly focused on themselves. All of them are worried about their own jobs, not worried about the jobs of Australians.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison is a prime minister who does too little too late. This is not about 20/20 hindsight. Throughout this pandemic Labor has been time and time again urging the Prime Minister to listen to expert advice, but time and time again our calls have fallen on deaf ears. But we will not stop trying. We won't stop calling this government out to do more to protect aged-care residents. We won't stop calling out this government to do more to deliver rapid antigen tests to those who need them. More importantly, we want a government that will lead, not focus on themselves.

In July the Japanese ambassador to Australia, Yamagami Shingo, spoke at the National Press Club. Mr Yamagami is the most senior diplomat to hold the post of ambassador to Australia. His seniority reflects the importance of our relationship at a time of critical issues in the region, the same as those which have resulted in the formation of the Quad with India, Japan and the US. There is a clear need in all these countries to form even stronger bonds with our allies and trading partners. His speech was timed to coincide with the opening of the Olympic Games. Just as the Olympics are as much about opportunities as about sport, Mr Yamagami took the opportunity to spruik the great potential that could be unlocked if our countries worked more closely together. Mr Yamagami said that his dream was to partner with Australia to roll out a Shinkansen network in Australia. It will surprise no-one who has listened to me before that I found this a very exciting idea.

I have met with the ambassador on a number of occasions since his speech and he remains passionate about the possibilities. His passion comes from his experience living outside of the chaos and hubbub of Central Tokyo but still being able to commute there every day. Since committing to high-speed rail back in the 1970s Japan has seen its cities completely change, as overcrowding and extreme growth pressures have been averted by allowing people from further out to commute. These regional hubs have in turn seen huge levels of development and growth, so they are now cities and destinations in their own right. This is the purpose of high-speed rail—not simply the provision of transport between two destinations but, rather, the catalyst for a whole-scale reimagining of settlement, easing congestion, housing costs and growth pressures in our major cities whilst spreading prosperity to our regions.

It should be clear that this is the solution to the problems that we face here in Australia today. With no plan of settlement, we have a random unbalanced focus on Melbourne and Sydney, overwhelming their infrastructure capacity and strangling potential growth. Our two major cities take some 85 per cent of immigrants and suffer some of the highest house prices on the planet. Our major cities are coal-guzzling, high-emitting old cities. With no effective plan of decentralisation put in place, this problem will only worsen.

These are the same problems that Japan faced. Like them, we could use the solution to these problems as a way of jumpstarting our economy in these uncertain times and assist in our recovery. The creation of new, smart, zero-emission cities and commutable times from our major CBDs will create megaregions that will compete on the world stage as a launchpad and as destinations of significance. We can create affordable housing and stimulate faltering regions. We will be able to incentivise hubs of health or manufacturing as we redesign our new cities of the future. We can do all this while doing more for the environment than any other plan that has been put forward so far.

Recent years have seen the engine of economic growth moving out of cities and into megaregions, like the north-east of the United States and the Rhine corridor in Europe. High-speed rail between Newcastle and Melbourne, and eventually up to the Sunshine Coast, will create a megaregion that can compete globally against these other centres. While the academic and community will is there, getting political momentum is proving harder. It is clear that over the last few decades nothing at all has been done. In the last 40 years the government has spent over $135 million on inquiries into high-speed rail, yet not one track has been laid. The first problem is cost, but this isn't such a problem. Building this infrastructure will be expensive—that's undeniable—but, when you compare the low cost of regional land currently with the cost of land in Sydney and Melbourne, or the cost of land in comparable mega regions, it is clear that so great an uplift can fund the cost of the infrastructure many times over. We just have to find a way to capture this uplift and hypothecate it towards the cost of the infrastructure. The last two inquiries into high-speed rail that I have chaired found that high-speed rail has never been funded by the ticket price alone, but it is paid for by gaining a share of the uplift in properties impacted by this transformational infrastructure.

At this time the Victorian government has announced a rezoning impost of 50 per cent and New South Wales a similar proposed impost on uplifting resulting from rezoning or from infrastructure investment. This is the start of the funding, but, when aligned across borders and matched with federal commitments to include capital gains tax revenues in the equation, it becomes even more profitable. Further levies on hyperprofits like those seen at Badgerys Creek should also be captured. This should not be seen as the introduction of a tax. There is a clear justification for retrieving some of the gains that have been created only by investment of taxpayers' money. That the taxpayers should recoup some of their investment back from the multimillionaire landowners is only fair and should be electorally popular.

The other main reason it doesn't quite get up is the electoral cycle. Three-year terms incentivise small-scale projects that can be announced at one election and delivered by the next. Media bites can accompany each small stage, and the prevailing belief is that these give huge benefit to the electoral prospects of members. Pork-barrelling is par for the course in Australia and is clearly done openly by both sides of politics. But just because everybody does it doesn't mean it's right. I've stood next to enough pedestrian crossings and roundabouts to know that they don't bring much support and they almost never fix the root causes of the problems, which are generally to do with much larger structural issues and lack of planning. So the bread and butter of the political game is not what will make Australia great and allow us to fulfil our potential. National infrastructure on this scale is clearly well outside the interests of this small-scale electoral cycle. Planning settlement and building huge pieces of infrastructure are the work of decades, not three years, and long-term plans that remain constant are less attractive in a political climate that prioritises new announcements over large deliveries. This is probably why we haven't seen a new interstate passenger train line built for the best part of a century.

To break this cycle we need to have a policy that will withstand the changes of a fluid electoral system. We need a plan that is supported across the parliamentary aisle. Therefore I ask the question: when will people in this place put important issues above politics and cooperate with each other and agree on long-term master planning of settlement? When will we agree on the essential infrastructure and a sustainable funding system that makes demands of those lucky landowners who profit so extraordinarily through the investment of taxpayers and favourable rezoning? We must have master planning of settlement, master planning of infrastructure and master planning of funding, to master our future. So please let's stop butting heads and let's get those heads together to serve us better. Bipartisanship is not the end of this combative parliament. There will still be differences on how and when we roll out the plans and tweaks along the way, but we must let those issues be the things we debate, not whether or not we take up these great challenges that will make such a difference to us now and in the future. This is too important to ignore.

I rise tonight to highlight our community fight to save Cudgen state significant farmland. Last week it was revealed that a private consortium will seek New South Wales government approval to advance a megadevelopment on 5.7 hectares of state significant farmland next to the new Tweed Valley hospital at Cudgen. For this massive development to go ahead, developers will need to be working very closely with the New South Wales Liberals and Nationals to change the zoning of the state significant farmland adjacent to the new hospital site.

In response to this extraordinary news I, along with Walt Secord, the New South Wales shadow minister for police and the North Coast, and Reece Byrnes, the Tweed Shire Council deputy mayor, have together called upon the Tweed Nationals MP Geoff Provest to take responsibility and have called on him to resign from state parliament if his government moves to rezone state significant farmland at Cudgen for developers.

When the new Tweed Valley hospital was approved on state significant farmland, locals were repeatedly promised by Tweed Nationals MP Geoff Provest that there would be no further development on the adjoining state significant farmland. And make no mistake about it: Geoff Provest must keep his election promise and ensure that his government does not rezone any part of that remaining state significant farmland at Cudgen. In fact, on PRIME7 News North Coast on 3 March 2020, when questioned about rezoning the land, Mr Provest stated that it was his election commitment to keep that land zoned as state significant and the government would follow through with that. Well, this issue has now become an escalating integrity crisis for Geoff Provest. If this land is rezoned, he needs to take responsibility and resign from state parliament, because his election in 2019 would then have been based on a lie. Everyone wants a new Tweed hospital. But we don't want this to open the door for massive overdevelopment on Cudgen farmlands.

I would now like to turn to the developer of this new project. The private consortium behind the proposed $250 million project are joint partners Centuria Capital Group and Digital Infratech. The director of Digital Infratech is Allan Larkin. The proposed site for the project was purchased in February 2019 by IRBS 1 Pty Ltd, which formerly traded as Aspect Property Group. The owner of Aspect is Allan Larkin, the director of Digital Infratech. At the time of the land purchase, it was widely publicly reported that Aspect had donated numerous times to the Liberal National Party in Queensland. Searches reveal that Aspect had donated more than $28,000 to the LNP in Queensland, including the infamous LNP Forward Brisbane Leadership Fund. So we are now calling on Geoff Provest to publicly release all correspondence he has been engaged in about this specific parcel of land, or the proposed development, including emails, texts or letters from these developers, any lobbyists, colourful National Party identities, or from within his own government or departments. We want to see all of that correspondence.

Labor's always been committed to protecting the Cudgen farmland from development, and that has not changed. While we don't know the full details of this $250 million project—and it may have some merits—it should not be built on state significant farmland. For the record, Labor's always supported the building of a new hospital for the Tweed. Our concern was that the location of the new hospital on state significant farmland would open Kingscliff to overdevelopment. With the re-election of the state Liberal-National government in 2019, the matter of the hospital location was settled. But this new proposed development validates all the concerns that Labor and the community had at the time about overdevelopment in the area.

Straight after the 2019 state election, we made it very clear that we would hold the New South Wales Liberal-National government to account for delivering the new hospital on time and keeping their election promise for free parking at the new hospital, which to date they have failed to guarantee. We also said we'd be holding them to account to ensure that the current Tweed hospital stays in public hands, to stop the New South Wales government from selling off the current hospital site to developers, and we made that strong commitment to hold the government to account to not allow any more development on state significant farmland at Cudgen. We've consistently raised these issues and we will continue to do so. Ultimately, if Tweed Nationals MP Geoff Provest and his government rezones Cudgen state significant farmland for developers, Geoff Provest must take responsibility and resign from the New South Wales state parliament.

I'd also like to pay tribute to our frontline healthcare workers. They have been outstanding throughout the pandemic and they've done this without the support and resources from the Morrison government or the New South Wales government. Today I stand with and support our nurses in New South Wales, who are striking for the first time in a decade. They're doing that because they're just fed up. They can't take it anymore. They don't have enough staff and they don't have enough resources and, therefore, they can't provide adequate care to their patients. I especially acknowledge the incredible nurses on the New South Wales North Coast—the heroes of the pandemic.

Our healthcare workers have been on the front line throughout the pandemic, going above and beyond day in, day out, sometimes putting themselves at risk. They have worked so incredibly hard for our community. The fact is that they're overworked and exhausted. Of course, this issue existed long before COVID, and the pandemic has just increased the problem. What they desperately need is support from the government. Our community values our nurses, and it's time for the New South Wales government to listen to them when they're crying out for more support. The New South Wales Premier and his government have shown no respect for health workers, refusing to listen to their concerns about safely staffing our hospitals. They need to listen. Instead, what have they done? They've frozen their pay; they've refused to look at nurse-to-patient ratios. The government needs to listen and act. Our nurses are at breaking point and our local hospitals are at breaking point.

The Guardian reported earlier this year that Tweed Heads hospital had 18 staff resign due to burnout. The article from 5 January reported that many nurses were doing 'double shifts every day', warning that they're going to 'fall over in a screaming heap'. There are reports the hospital had to source its own triage team and that staff have been forced to drive COVID patients around in their own cars. It's just appalling. This government, the Morrison government, and the New South Wales government knew a surge in cases was coming. They knew and they were still woefully unprepared. The article I've just referred to also mentioned that the hospital was struggling to source adequate PPE, which is just remarkable. Byron Bay hospital in my electorate is under the same sort of pressure, with staff shortages, PPE shortages and a lack of transport options for COVID-positive patients. The Guardian reported on 8 January that 'COVID-positive patients are being left in bays behind curtains' and that one patient waited 45 hours to be transported to the region's designated COVID hospital.

The Morrison government's and the New South Wales government's rolling incompetence and mismanagement have caused this dire situation. First we had the Prime Minister failing to order enough vaccines for the nation. Then we had their bungled rollout. It never seemed to end. Those of us in the regions were desperate to have the vaccine, but then, when we finally did get some Pfizer, the New South Wales government stole it from our region and took it back to Sydney. Then, of course, we had the New South Wales government's incompetence in failing to lock down Sydney fast enough, which resulted in the massive spread of delta throughout New South Wales. Then, of course, we had limited access to PCR testing, which was closed over most of Christmas, and locals were unable to source rapid antigen tests. These tests should be free and easily accessible.

Time and time again we have seen the incompetence of both the Morrison government and the New South Wales government, which has led to this dire situation and put huge pressure on all of our frontline healthcare workers. I stand with those nurses today. We saw thousands of them around the state stand up and say, 'This is not good enough.' They have been working so hard. They have been absolute heroes, and I want to pay tribute to them for working so incredibly hard for our community during this amazingly difficult time. Thank you for your great work. I call upon the Morrison government and the New South Wales government to start listening to these people who are at the front line, doing the hard yards to serve our community throughout this pandemic. The New South Wales government in particular needs to listen to the concerns of our nurses and what they're looking for. We need to have these services provided so these nurses can care for patients more. This is an urgent crisis, and I call upon both the federal and the state governments to listen to our healthcare workers.

I rise to speak about an issue that's very important to the people of Higgins, and that is the recognition of our Indigenous Australians and their wonderful culture, which stretches back more than 60,000 years—the longest living culture on this planet. As Australians, we know that Indigenous Australians, unfortunately, have poorer outcomes than we would hope for, and that is across a whole range of different areas. These include poor outcomes in terms of health, education, housing, jobs, the number of youths in detention—the list goes on.

It's not easy to tackle these problems, but the Morrison government is doing this by allowing Indigenous voices to work with government. It's an essential part of the way the government has decided to work in a co-designed process. For too long, governments have done things to Indigenous Australians, not with Indigenous Australians. This government has taken a grassroots approach, in which we have made numerous practical changes by collaborating with Indigenous leaders. This is so that meaningful and practical changes can be made that symbolise the fundamental importance of Indigenous culture to Australia and its history and that, more importantly, help close the gap on the inequities that Indigenous Australians have faced for decades.

The Morrison government last year released the first Closing the Gap Implementation Plan, along with $1 billion in new measures to help achieve the outcomes. This includes $378 million for a new redress scheme for stolen generations survivors from the Northern Territory, the Australian Capital Territory and the Jervis Bay Territory. I'm proud to be a member of the Joint Select Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme, which helps oversee this redress scheme, and I note that Mr Deputy Speaker Dick is also a member. These schemes are so important to the long and ongoing healing process. We have to recognise the injustices of the past. We have to deal with the ongoing injustices. This is a small step forward, but it is an important step.

In addition, the government has announced $254 million towards infrastructure to better support Aboriginal community controlled health organisations, affectionately known as ACCHOs. This government is also investing $160 million in new funding to ensure the best start in life for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, through initiatives such as the Healthy Mums, Healthy Bubs program, the Community Child Care Fund, the Connected Beginnings program and the Early Years Education Program. Many decades ago now, when I was a medical student, I spent time in Arnhem Land in the Northern Territory, and it is so great to hear that the early pilot programs that were started in those days are now properly and federally funded to make sure that the best services can be provided to our newest and youngest Indigenous Australians.

This government is also providing increased investment in the Indigenous Languages and Arts program and in funding for additional language centres to protect the most at-risk Indigenous languages. Anybody who's been to rural and remote parts of Australia understands that these languages are at risk of being lost. There are many hundreds of Indigenous languages, and to maintain and support them is incredibly important to upholding the richness and diversity of Indigenous Australian culture.

Supporting the establishment of a joint policy partnership on justice to agree on focus areas of action to drive outcomes on reducing Indigenous incarceration is another important area, which I know the Attorney-General, the Hon. Michaelia Cash, in particular, has at the heart of some of the things she is doing.

We will continue to work to close the gap, and I know that this is a bipartisan wish of this parliament. But, in my first speech, I said that a strong country is one that is at peace with its past. Non-Indigenous Australians do care deeply about how we show respect to our Indigenous Australians, and this is why the Morrison government has enacted a number of different changes in the last few years which are symbolic and partner with the practical aspects of the Closing the Gap investments that have been made.

One of those is the recent change, a year ago now, to our national anthem—from 'young and free', which doesn't reflect the multicultural and Indigenous Australian cultural aspects of our country, to 'one and free', which is much more inclusive of the fact that we can partner with an Indigenous culture that goes back so many thousands—tens of thousands—of years. As the Prime Minister has said, it takes nothing away, but it adds so much. It recognises the distance we have travelled as a nation and that we still have a place to go. It recognises that our national story is drawn from more than 300 national ancestries and language groups. We are the most successful multicultural nation on Earth and we must continue to strive to do better to ensure that we are all inclusive of our diverse multicultural heritage. It reaffirms our resolve as one of the world's oldest democracies, while honouring the foundations upon which our nation has been built and the aspirations we share for the future.

For the last 25 years, the Australian Aboriginal flag has been troubled by copyright claims, effectively rendering the flag private property. As such, the flag could not be used without permission being granted and royalties being paid—not least to foster the sense of pride and love that is required for us to embrace the Indigenous flag for all Australians. In light of this, the Australian government has moved to set free the Aboriginal flag, and the Commonwealth now holds the copyright, and the flag belongs to everyone, and no-one can take that away. The Aboriginal flag will now be managed in a similar manner to the Australian national flag, where its use is free but it must be presented in a respectful and dignified way. This means all Australians can now put the Aboriginal flag on apparel such as sports jerseys and shirts without having to ask for permission or pay a fee.

The third aspect I'd like to talk about is Ngurra, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Precinct, which has just been funded by the federal government and which is to be built in the Parliamentary Triangle. This will be an important, meaningful place, where learning and knowledge can centre around a national resting place to care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ancestral remains, and it is a new home for the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies.

I was honoured to have the Minister for Indigenous Australians—in fact, the first Indigenous Australian to be a minister for Indigenous Australians—the Hon. Ken Wyatt visit Higgins just last week. His approach to his portfolio, which is gentle, reflective and respectful, brought to us the understanding that all Australians are on the journey of healing and peace with regard to Indigenous Australians, and the concept of yarning, which is walking together and talking together.

We made many visits. One was to the King David School, where we viewed the federally funded Indigenous mural painted by senior school students and a First Nations artist together, and we discussed the school's reconciliation action plan and the importance of closing the gap, with their very impressive community school leaders—Alex Cowen, the granddaughter of the great Australian Sir Zelman Cowen; and Ari Epstein, along with principal Marc Light. The King David School has developed a vision statement in conjunction with parents and students, and they are to be congratulated on the work they are doing on Indigenous recognition.

The minister also came to visit Herring Island, where we received an impromptu and knowledgeable guided tour from Rodolfo, from Parks Victoria, who shared his in-depth knowledge about the Indigenous sculptures across the island.

Lastly, we visited Ama House, where we finished the tour, and we were greatly warmed by the welcoming ceremony from Uncle Steve. We shared a coffee while hearing stories, and we spoke in a yarning circle with CEO Marg about initiatives for change and their commitment to teaching about our long and rich Indigenous history and culture.

At every visit, Minister Wyatt listened and shared insightful learnings from his time as Minister for Indigenous Australians. We are very fortunate to have such a rockstar minister working in a very important portfolio.

Lastly, I would like to mention the federal government delivering on its commitment to co-design an Indigenous voice to parliament that would provide a way for Indigenous Australians to provide advice on matters that are important to improving their lives. The government allocated funding to the co-design process, and, following extensive co-design consultation led by 52 members and involving more than 9,400 people and organisations, the Indigenous voice co-design final report to the Australian government was delivered in December 2021.

These are very important initiatives, and I welcome the changes that have been made in recognition of the importance of Indigenous Australians to all of Australia. There is so much more that we have to do, but Australians have a strong sense of pride in our country, and this needs to include embracing, understanding and caring about our Indigenous Australians. We will work every day to make our country more united and more inclusive.

The time for the grievance debate has expired. The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 192(b). The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:30