﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2026-08-19</date>
    <parliament.no>3</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>0</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;" />
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Wednesday, 19 August 2026</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">DEPUTY </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;"> Sharon</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Claydon</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Line" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Line"> </span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Selection Committee</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Speaker I present report No. 14 of the Selection Committee relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and private members' business on Monday 7 September 2026. The report will be printed in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> today and the committee's determinations will appear on tomorrow's <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>. Copies of the report have been placed on the table.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">Report relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and of private Members' business</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The Committee met in private session on Tuesday, 18 August 2026.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2. The Committee deliberated on items of committee and delegation business that had been notified, private Members' business items listed on the Notice Paper and notices lodged on Tuesday, 18 August 2026, and determined the order of precedence and times on Monday, 7 September 2026, as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for House of Representatives Chamber (10.10 am to 12 noon)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 MR LITTLEPROUD: To present a Bill for an Act to repeal legislation relating to firearms, and for related purposes. (<inline font-style="italic">Firearms Legislation Amendment (Repealing Unfair Gun Laws) Bill 2026</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 MS CHANEY: To present a Bill for an Act to regulate the use of automated decision-making by the Commonwealth, and for related purposes. (<inline font-style="italic">Automated Decision-Making (Safeguards and Transparency) Bill 2026</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 MR GEE: To present a Bill for an Act to protect Australians from the risks of artificial intelligence and to control the construction of data centres for the safeguarding of our land and communities, and for related purposes. (<inline font-style="italic">AI Kill Switch and Data Centre Control Bill 2026</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4 MS K COOK: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that Mental Health Month is observed throughout October each year to raise awareness of mental health, reduce stigma and encourage all Australians to seek support when they need it;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises the importance of mental health to the wellbeing of individuals, families and communities, and acknowledges the role played by families, carers, lived experience advocates, peer workers, community organisations and health professionals in supporting Australians experiencing mental health challenges;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) welcomes the Government's continued investment in strengthening Australia's mental health system, including through:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the rollout of Medicare Mental Health Centres, with more than 56 of the planned 92 centres now open nationwide, providing free, walk-in mental health support with no referral or diagnosis required;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the establishment of Medicare Mental Health Kids Hubs, providing free support for children aged 0 to 12 and their families, with 17 Kids Hubs being rolled out across the country;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) expanding the network of headspace services and upgrading 30 centres to a new and enhanced headspace Plus model, providing young Australians with accessible mental health care, early intervention and holistic support;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the new national early intervention service, Medicare Mental Health Check In, providing free guided digital support and low intensity therapy to help Australians build practical skills; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) strengthening access to mental health care through Medicare and community-based services;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) acknowledges that early intervention, community connection and reducing stigma are critical to improving mental health outcomes and preventing suicide; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) encourages all Australians during Mental Health Month to check in with family members, friends, neighbours and colleagues, seek support when they need it, and help build communities where every person feels connected, supported and able to access quality mental health care.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 11 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">40 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms K Cook</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">5 MR PIKE: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises the Opposition's plan to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) deliver lower taxes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) deliver lower power prices;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) provide more housing; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) put Australians first;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges the Opposition's plan to deliver cheaper power and more reliable energy for households, small businesses and communities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) highlights the Opposition's plan to deliver less migration and more homes, so housing, infrastructure and services can better keep pace with demand;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) supports the Opposition's plan to put Australians first by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) managing the budget responsibly;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) paying down debt; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) investing in Australia's future; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) calls on the Government to adopt practical policies that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) ease pressure on families;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) back workers and small businesses;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) strengthen communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) restore confidence in Australia's future.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">25 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Pike</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 5 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">6 MS CLUTTERHAM: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the significance of the recent signing of the Australia-Vanuatu Nakamal Agreement;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that this broad ranging partnership reflects:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the meaningful relationship between the people of Australia and Vanuatu, which is built on a desire to support Vanuatu's critical infrastructure development and economic aspirations;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the collaborative motivation to build climate and natural disaster resilience for the benefit of both people of Australia and Vanuatu; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the recognition that when the security and sovereignty of Australia and Vanuatu is supported, the Indo-Pacific region enjoys greater stability and prosperity; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) affirms the Government's strategic commitment to continue to deepen Australia's security and economic relationships with our Pacific family and Indo-Pacific partners to strengthen the foundations for ongoing and sustainable regional peace and prosperity.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 13 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">remaining private Members' business time prior to 12 noon.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Clutterham</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 3 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (11 am to 1.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 MR CALDWELL: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) condemns the Government's housing failures, which under this Government has seen the housing shortfall increase to 400,000 persons, roughly the population of Canberra;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) highlights that home building has fallen to around 170,000 homes a year under the Government, down from around 200,000 homes under the previous Government;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises the Opposition's plan to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) restore the Australian dream of home ownership by freeing up housing stock and beginning to fix the housing shortage; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) cut back the 2,000 page National Construction Code, giving Australians the ability to build cheaper safe, secure, and good homes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) acknowledges the Opposition's commitment to overhaul our skilled migration intake so that Australia brings in people with the skills that businesses desperately need;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further recognises the Opposition's plan to establish a $5 billion Housing Infrastructure Fund to unlock up to 400,000 new homes, including in regional Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Government to adopt practical policies that make it cheaper, easier and faster to build new homes.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">25 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Caldwell</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 5 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 MS FERNANDO: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises the Prime Minister's announcement that the Government will establish a new Fair Work Court;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that the aims of the Fair Work Court are to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) provide simpler, fairer and faster access to justice for working Australians; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) ensure that workers are not placed in a position where the cost of pursuing a claim exceeds the value of the claim; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further notes that the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Fair Work Court would be staffed by specialist judges with expertise in workplace relations; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Government will consult with workers, employers and legal experts on the operation of the Fair Work Court, including how it can improve access to justice and better support workers and employers in navigating workplace disputes.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 11 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Fernando</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 DR WEBSTER: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) private health insurance is an important component of Australia's health care system, providing greater choice while reducing demand on the public system;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) more than 3.1 million Australians aged 65 years and over hold private hospital cover, with many maintaining it over decades to provide greater certainty over their healthcare as they age;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Government's proposed changes to the private health insurance rebate for Australians aged 65 years and over will increase the cost of private health insurance for older Australians;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) on 12 August 2026, National Seniors Australia (NSA) released the results of a survey examining how older Australians may respond to the proposed rebate changes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) of the 2,042 respondents:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) 8.4 per cent indicated they were considering dropping their hospital cover; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) 12.5 per cent were considering reducing their level of hospital cover;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) NSA estimates that, if the survey findings were reflected across the wider population, up to 270,000 older Australians could drop their hospital cover and up to 400,000 could reduce their level of cover, significantly exceeding the Government's estimates;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) NSA reports that the real cost could exceed $1,000 per year for a couple holding gold hospital cover;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) older Australians, particularly pensioners and those on fixed incomes, should not have to choose between maintaining health insurance and paying for the essentials; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) measures that encourage older Australians to downgrade or discontinue private hospital cover risk transferring additional demand to an already stretched public hospital system, with potentially disproportionate consequences for rural and regional patients; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) release transparent modelling of the expected impact of the changes on:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) private health insurance premiums and participation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) older Australians, including pensioners and people with gold hospital cover;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) the number of full aged pensioners who will be forced to pay more for private health insurance;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) demand for elective surgery and other services within the public hospital system; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) rural and regional health services; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) explain the discrepancy between the Government's estimated financial impact and the potential costs and behavioural responses identified by NSA.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">25 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Dr Webster</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 5 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4 MS PAYNE: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises that the Government is delivering the infrastructure Australia needs to support growing communities, improve road safety, strengthen productivity and build better-connected communities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that the 2026-27 budget continues the Government's long-term commitment to transport and community infrastructure that creates jobs, supports economic growth and improves the lives of Australians wherever they live, including within our territories;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) commends the ongoing Commonwealth investment through the Infrastructure Investment Program to strengthen:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) communities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) freight productivity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) regional connectivity; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) economic development across the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) notes that the Government is supporting the Northern Territory Government to deliver infrastructure that meets the territory's needs, including most recently:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) progress on upgrades to the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) Santa Teresa Road, which is part of the $332 million Government investment in the Northern Territory Strategic Roads Package; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) Central Arnhem Road; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) community infrastructure investments to deliver amenities and services in remote communities, while supporting local jobs and economic opportunities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further notes that the Government is supporting the Australian Capital Territory Government to ensure Canberra's infrastructure keeps pace with the demands of a growing region, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a $50 million investment to deliver the staged duplication of Drake Brockman Drive; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a further $50 million towards upgrades for the Sydney to Canberra rail corridor; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) further commends the Government for continuing to invest in nationally significant and local community infrastructure projects that support territory communities, regional development and economic opportunity through the 2026-27 budget and the Infrastructure Investment Program.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 11 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Payne</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">5 MR HAMILTON: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that power prices are far too high under the Government, with electricity bills increasing by around 40 per cent and Australian households spending an extra $23 billion on energy bills over the past four years;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) condemns the Government for turning its back on affordable and reliable energy, including coal and gas, and forcing consumers to pay for higher costs and unreliable energy policy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises individuals, families, small businesses, farmers, manufacturers and miners need affordable and reliable energy to keep household budgets under control, remain competitive and support Australian jobs;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls out the Government for making Australia more dependent on imported fuel, with around 90 per cent of transport fuel now brought in from overseas, placing the economy and national security at risk;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) supports the Opposition's plan to deliver cheaper power and energy abundance by backing all technologies that can provide affordable and reliable energy, including coal, gas, hydro, nuclear, batteries and renewables in the right places; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Government to adopt practical energy policies that lower power prices, strengthen fuel security, support Australian businesses and restore Australia's energy independence.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">25 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Hamilton</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 5 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 COMMONWEALTH PRAC PAYMENT: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 17 August 2026</inline>) on the motion of Ms Fernando—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) commends the Government for investing a further $158.4 million to expand the Commonwealth Prac Payment (CPP) to students training in ten additional frontline health professions;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that, from 1 July 2027, this expansion will build on paid prac already available to eligible teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students, with around 95,000 students expected to receive support each year;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) practical placements are a significant part of health degrees, making up more than a year of study in some courses; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) travel, accommodation and relocation costs can discourage students from undertaking placements in regional and remote Australia, where health workforce shortages are often most acute;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) notes that eligible students currently receive $338.60 a week, benchmarked to the single Austudy rate and indexed annually, providing real cost of living relief while they undertake mandatory placements; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further acknowledges that expanding CPP will help more students complete their qualifications, growing the health workforce Australians rely on and strengthening Medicare.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">remaining private Members' business time prior to 1.30 pm.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 3 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (4.45 pm to 7.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day — continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 COMMONWEALTH PRAC PAYMENT: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 17 August 2026</inline>) on the motion of Ms Fernando—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) commends the Government for investing a further $158.4 million to expand the Commonwealth Prac Payment (CPP) to students training in ten additional frontline health professions;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that, from 1 July 2027, this expansion will build on paid prac already available to eligible teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students, with around 95,000 students expected to receive support each year;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) practical placements are a significant part of health degrees, making up more than a year of study in some courses; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) travel, accommodation and relocation costs can discourage students from undertaking placements in regional and remote Australia, where health workforce shortages are often most acute;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) notes that eligible students currently receive $338.60 a week, benchmarked to the single Austudy rate and indexed annually, providing real cost of living relief while they undertake mandatory placements; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further acknowledges that expanding CPP will help more students complete their qualifications, growing the health workforce Australians rely on and strengthening Medicare.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">15 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 3 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices — continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">6 MR KATTER: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australian agriculture contributes about $100 billion to Australia's economy, feeds our nation and is fundamental to the nation's food security, regional employment and economic resilience;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Australian farmers have some of the highest input costs in the world, such as:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) high wages;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) high regulatory compliance;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) high freight; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) high fertiliser costs;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) Australian farmers also have some of the lowest levels of government producer subsidies and support in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, unlike counterparts in the European Union, United States of America or Japan who receive extensive state backing;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) these conditions have made Australia highly vulnerable to agricultural imports, many of which have destroyed our Australian farms, such as the grape, apple and citrus sectors, and ultimately led to higher supermarket prices for consumers; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) despite the significant environmental, social and economic impacts of international agricultural imports, the Government is currently considering import applications, or allowing imports, for bananas, peanuts, pomelos, mangosteens, garlic, and ginger; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) take immediate and decisive action to protect Australia's agricultural sector by ensuring that any import application relating to fresh produce be rejected unless it is demonstrated by the applying country that there is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) no biosecurity risk;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) no social or economic impact on Australian farmers or their communities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) no difference in chemical and pesticide usage and overall environmental standards;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) no difference in cost of production including wages and working conditions; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) an overriding need and demand for the imported product; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) immediately introduce legislation that prohibits imports if non-compliant with international obligations including, but not restricted to, slavery, child labour and other unfair working conditions and wages, and environmental impacts including pesticide and chemical usage.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Katter</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">7 MS K COOK: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) 1 July 2026 marks one year since the Government launched the Cheaper Home Batteries Program, providing a discount of around 30 per cent on the cost of a typical home battery; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) in that time, more than 450,000 Australian households have installed a cheaper home battery;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) commends the Government on one year of the Cheaper Home Batteries Program, which has delivered real cost of living relief to hundreds of thousands of Australian families and small businesses;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) welcomes the Australian Energy Market Operator's findings last week that these batteries are already 'helping to moderate prices during evening peaks and to support grid reliability and security as coal plants withdraw'; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) supports the Government as it continues to make clean energy more affordable for all Australians.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 25 June 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms K Cook</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">8 MR VIOLI: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that the Government's cost of living crisis is forcing Australians to pay more for groceries, power, insurance, mortgages and rents, while inflation and bracket creep are leaving workers worse off;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) condemns the Government's 'inflation tax' as a stealth raid on Australians who are working hard, earning more just to keep up with inflation, and then being pushed into higher tax brackets;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises the Opposition's Tax Back Guarantee would end this dishonest bracket creep by indexing income tax thresholds to inflation, protecting 85 per cent of taxpayers from 2028-29, and all taxpayers from 2031-32;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls out the Government's higher tax agenda on housing, savings, start-ups, trusts and small and family businesses, which punishes aspiration and makes it harder for Australians to work, save, invest and get ahead;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) supports the Opposition's plan to back small business by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) making a $50,000 instant asset write-off permanent for businesses with turnover under $10 million;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) expanding access to capital gains tax concessions; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) consulting on a new Small Business Act; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) remove its harmful higher taxes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) reduce red tape; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) stop choosing which Australians and businesses are allowed to pursue aspiration and which are forced to carry the burden of the Government's tax agenda.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Violi</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">9 MR GEORGANAS: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) commends the Government for its <inline font-style="italic">Statement on Space</inline>, which provides a clear, focused, and strategic framework to support the growth and development of Australia's space industry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises the strong partnerships, collaboration, and shared commitment among industry stakeholders, researchers, Government agencies, and commercial operators that are driving innovation across the Australian space sector;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) acknowledges that Australia has a significant opportunity to develop trusted sovereign space services that Australians rely on every day, strengthening national capability and reducing reliance on externally controlled systems;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) notes the potential for a commercially scalable spaceflight ecosystem that provides pathways for Australian technologies, research, and payloads to reach application and deployment, ensuring a greater share of the value generated by mission activities is retained within Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further recognises that the development of domestic space platform capability presents opportunities to integrate Australian technologies into both Australian and international missions through satellites and multi-orbit constellations, enhancing Australia's role in the global space economy; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) further acknowledges Australia's unique opportunity to build on its strong and credible foundations in the space sector to participate in, and capture value from, emerging space-based industries, including in-space manufacturing and biotechnology development, where flight and return capabilities can enable the utilisation of microgravity environments for research, innovation, and commercial outcomes.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 17 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">20 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Georganas</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">10 MR SMALL: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the Opposition's plan to put Australians first by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) managing the budget responsibly;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) reducing debt; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) making sure the Government spends within its means;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that when government spending is out of control, everyday Australians pay the price through higher taxes, higher prices and greater pressure on family budgets;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further notes the Opposition's plan to place a speed limit on government spending, so that the Government does not keep spending faster than the economy can afford;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) acknowledges the Opposition's commitment to restore the tax-to-gross domestic product cap, so that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Government takes less from Australians; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) families, workers and small businesses can keep more of what they earn;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further recognises the Opposition's Tax Back Guarantee and Future Generations Fund as practical measures to help pay down debt, protect taxpayers and invest in infrastructure that benefits future generations; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Government to put Australians first by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) easing pressure on households and small businesses;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) strengthening the budget; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) making responsible decisions that protect Australia's future.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">20 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Small</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">5 minutes</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">11 MR M SMITH: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises that lifting productivity requires governments to remove unnecessary costs and barriers that make it harder for businesses to invest, hire and expand;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) welcomes the Govemment's productivity reforms, including measures to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) make standards referenced in Australian legislation free to access;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) reduce duplicated regulatory reporting and paperwork;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) streamline foreign investment and major project approvals;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) make it easier for skilled workers to use their qualifications across state and territory borders; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) support faster housing approvals and modern construction methods;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) national competition policy reforms are estimated to add around $13 billion to the Australian economy each year once implemented, equivalent to an average benefit of around $1,200 per household; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) making construction standards free will save some small trade businesses up to $1,600 each year in access fees; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) supports continued cooperation between the Commonwealth, states and territories to build a more seamless, competitive and productive national economy.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 18 August 2026.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">remaining private Members' business time prior to 7.30 pm.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr M Smith</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">THE HON D. M. DICK MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Speaker of the House of Representatives</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">19 August 2026</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>9</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>News Journalism Payments Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7528" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">News Journalism Payments Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>9</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 133, I shall now proceed to put the question on the amendment to the motion moved for the second reading of the News Journalism Payments Bill of 2026, on which a division was called for and deferred in accordance with the standing order. No further debate is allowed.</para>
<para>The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Lindsay be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [09:06]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Sharon Claydon)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>40</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aldred, M. R. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Batt, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chaffey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Farley, D.</name>
                  <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Kennedy, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Penfold, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Rebello, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Venning, T. H.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>83</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare, J. D.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.<br />Debate adjourned.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026, Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026, Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026, Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7458" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7507" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7527" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7523" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>():  I declare that, unless otherwise ordered, the following bills stand referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration: (1) Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026 immediately and (2) Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026, Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 and Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2026 at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for second reading of each bill.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>11</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Intelligence and Security Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>11</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>():  On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's advisory report on the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026.</para>
<para>Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I rise today to present a report on behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security for its review of the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026. The bill was referred to the committee by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on 2 July 2026 for inquiry and report. The committee received 11 submissions from a range of stakeholders, including universities, local government representatives, academics and relevant Commonwealth agencies, and held a public hearing in Canberra on 6 August 2026.</para>
<para>The bill seeks to strengthen, streamline and clarify the operation of Australia's Foreign Arrangements Scheme and implements recommendations arising from the 2025 independent review led by Rosemary Huxtable AO, PSM. The scheme, established under the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Act 2020, provides a framework through which the Commonwealth can maintain visibility of and, where necessary, manage arrangements between state and territory entities and foreign entities that may affect Australia's interests.</para>
<para>A central feature of the bill is the proposed shift from a focus on Australia's foreign relations to a broader concept of the national interest. The committee carefully considered evidence on this proposal. While some submitters expressed concerns regarding the breadth of the term, others observed that Australia's economic security, national security, research capability, foreign policy and international engagement are increasingly interconnected. The committee concluded that the proposed amendments more accurately reflect the contemporary strategic environment and will allow foreign arrangements to be assessed against the full range of Australia's national interests.</para>
<para>The committee also examined proposed reforms intended to reduce regulatory burden and better focus the scheme on higher risk activities. These include introducing a one-step notification process for non-core arrangements, reducing approval requirements for minor variations of previously approved arrangements, clarifying institutional autonomy, provisions for foreign universities and improving the operation of the public register.</para>
<para>The committee notes the broad support from submitters for a more risk-based approach to regulation if implementation remains proportionate and practical.</para>
<para>The inquiry also considered the bill's extension of the scheme to certain arrangements entered into through overseas campuses of Australian universities. The committee recognises the importance of transnational education and international research collaboration to Australia's economic and strategic interests. At the same time, the committee considers it appropriate that the Commonwealth maintains visibility of foreign arrangements entered into through overseas campuses where comparable activities undertaken within Australia would already be subject to the scheme.</para>
<para>Local government stakeholders similarly welcomed reforms intended to simplify compliance and reduce unnecessary administrative burden. The committee agrees that maintaining a risk based framework is particularly important given the diversity of local councils and the generally low-risk nature of many local-government international-engagement activities.</para>
<para>Throughout the inquiry, submitters emphasised that many of the bill's anticipated benefits will depend on the content of the rules and the quality of implementation guidance provided by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The committee agrees that clear guidance, consultation and outreach will be important to ensure the scheme operates efficiently and that intended compliance savings are realised in practice.</para>
<para>Ultimately, the committee found broad support for the policy objectives of the bill. The committee considers that the amendments strike an appropriate balance between maintaining Commonwealth visibility and oversight of foreign arrangements that may affect Australia's national interests, while reducing unnecessary regulatory burden for lower risk activities. Accordingly, the committee has made one recommendation—that the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026 be passed by the parliament.</para>
<para>I thank the Chair, Senator Ciccone, committee members and all those who contributed to the inquiry through submissions and evidence at the public hearing, I commend the report to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>12</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7507" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>12</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026, under which our Foreign Arrangement Scheme operates—a scheme the purpose of which is to ensure that Australia has a single coherent approach to foreign engagement not just in policy but also in practice, a scheme that seeks to ensure Australia's foreign policy is consistently at the centre of international engagements regardless of whether or not the Commonwealth is involved.</para>
<para>Our states, territories, councils and public universities engage with governments and institutions around the world every single day. That engagement is overwhelmingly positive, but problems can arise, deliberately or otherwise, where foreign actors seek to influence or extract information from Australian institutions in ways that cut across our national interest. Such is the risk that, where an Australian public entity enters into an arrangement with a foreign government entity, it is obliged to notify the Commonwealth, which in turn has the ability to cancel an arrangement in the event that it is not in Australia's national interest. That is how the Foreign Arrangements Scheme operates. It is why the former coalition government established the scheme in 2020.</para>
<para>A major catalyst at the time was the Victorian Labor government's unilateral decision to sign up to the Belt and Road Initiative of the People's Republic of China. This exposed a serious problem: an Australian state government had entered into a significant BRI agreement, and the Commonwealth had limited ability to ensure the agreement was consistent with Australia's foreign policy. The coalition fixed that. We established the Foreign Arrangements Scheme and, in April 2021, Victoria's BRI agreement was cancelled. Five years on, the operation of the scheme has proven its value. By November 2024, more than 18,000 foreign arrangements had been notified, of which more than 14,000 were found to fall within the scheme. Due to the scheme, the Commonwealth gained visibility over foreign arrangements that it simply did not have previously, but experience in operating the scheme also helped identify areas for its improvement. To date, for example, the scheme has resulted in too much effort processing arrangements that pose little or no genuine risk to Australia. Around 92 per cent of core arrangements and 75 per cent of non-core arrangements did not require complex assessment. In many cases these were routine arrangements—student credit transfers, sister city relationships or ordinary educational engagement.</para>
<para>There is little national benefit in drowning universities, councils, state and territory governments and the Commonwealth in unnecessary paperwork about run of the mill routine arrangements. That was one of the central findings of the Huxtable review, a statutory review into the scheme that concluded last year. The review found the scheme was effective but needed to be better targeted and less burdensome. This bill is the government's response to those findings. Much of it is sensible, and thus the coalition will support the passage of this bill.</para>
<para>The bill moves the decision-making framework from the narrower concept of Australia's foreign relations towards the broader national interest. It improves information sharing and gives the Foreign minister greater flexibility to manage risk through conditions. It also seeks to cut unnecessary compliance by reducing repeat notifications and dealing more sensibly with minor variations and innocent administrative errors. These are worthwhile reforms.</para>
<para>The coalition established this scheme. We want it to continue working and to be improved so it is even more effective. If an arrangement poses little genuine risk to Australia, regulated entities should not be wasting time navigating unnecessary bureaucracy. But the reverse is also true. Where an arrangement presents a real risk to Australia's national interest, the Commonwealth needs visibility of it and the power to act, and that is where experience has shown the government's proposed changes to be incomplete.</para>
<para>There is one gap in particular which the coalition believes must be addressed, and that is in the area of researcher-to-researcher collaboration. Under the scheme, a public university has obligations where it wishes to enter into an arrangement with a foreign entity. But if a researcher employed by that same university enters directly into a collaboration with a foreign researcher or institution and the university itself is not formally a party to the arrangement then that collaboration is not captured by the scheme. Think about that in practice. Two arrangements could involve substantially the same research, the same sensitive technology and the same potential risk to Australia. One involves a university directly, while the other involves a researcher who belongs to the university. One is visible to the Commonwealth, and the other is not simply because of how the arrangement is structured. My point is this: the national security risk does not disappear because the paperwork has a researcher's name on it instead of the employing university's.</para>
<para>This is not theoretical. Earlier this year, The <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> newspaper reported that researchers from Australian universities had collaborated with Iranian researchers on work involving unmanned drone technology. Those reports involved researchers associated with the University of Sydney, UNSW and Adelaide University. There has since been further scrutiny of Australian academic links with Iran, including an investigation by the University of Sydney into the travel and research links of one of its academics. I do not intend to prejudice, or prejudge at least, every detail of those individual cases, but I note that questions remain about what particular work was undertaken and precisely what institutional arrangements may have applied. What matters is the question for the parliament to which these cases give rise—namely, does the bill before the House today capture comparable high-risk collaborations such as those between researchers? The answer is no, and this is the gap that needs to be closed.</para>
<para>We recognise that the Foreign Arrangements Scheme is not the only protection against foreign interference or inappropriate foreign involvement in Australian research, and nor should it be; there are other safeguards. The University Foreign Interference Task Force, UFIT, brings government and universities together to manage foreign interference risks. Its guidelines encourage universities to undertake due diligence and maintain systems for disclosure and transparency. Australian sanctions law also has a role, and the Australian Research Council now conducts strengthened national security screening of ARC grant applications.</para>
<para>Indeed, in May this year, the education minister refused funding for 13 ARC grant applications on those grounds. This is a good thing. It shows that the Commonwealth already accepts the principle that sensitive research and foreign affiliations require scrutiny. But ARC screening protects just one stream of Australian grant funding; it is not a general safeguard for significant research collaborations occurring outside that system. What happens when access to Australian research is provided through a direct researcher-to-researcher collaboration? What happens when a foreign institution or foreign actor funds that collaboration? We need confidence that foreign money cannot be used to buy access or to influence sensitive capability through Australian researchers without appropriate scrutiny.</para>
<para>UFIT has a role. Sanctions law has a role. ARC screening has a role. But these measures do not fill the gaps in this legislation. Let me provide an example. In response to reports of Australian researchers' involvement with dual-use technology in Iran, the government had the education department write a series of warning letters to the relevant universities in March this year. When it was later revealed that Sydney university had sent a staff member to Iran last year, in defiance of warnings, the course of action taken by the education department was to send yet another letter to reiterate the government's expectations.</para>
<para>Strongly worded letters from ministers to universities and the issuance of guidelines are not a substitute for a statutory obligation. The government has relied on letters and statements of expectation to universities to manage some of these issues, but they have not proven to be effective. That should tell us something. An expression of an expectation is not an obligation. A letter from a minister is not a statutory notification requirement.</para>
<para>The coalition created this scheme, and we continue to believe it is an important layer of Australia's national security architecture. To this end, I urge the Labor Party to work constructively with the coalition to ensure that the Australian government has the necessary powers to protect Australia's national interest.</para>
<para>While we acknowledge that there is more to be done outside of this scheme, the first step is getting this bill right. That is why the coalition is seeking to amend the bill. Our amendment is targeted. It does not intend to capture routine academic engagement; nor does it discourage engagement. Indeed, international academic collaboration is important to Australian research, and it should continue. But technology developed for civilian purposes can have military applications, research can move across borders quickly and foreign governments understand the strategic value of gaining access to Australian science, technology and knowledge. Our laws need to recognise that reality.</para>
<para>Our amendment effectively requires public universities to notify the Commonwealth of significant research collaborations entered into by members of their academic or research staff with foreign researchers or foreign research institutions, regardless of whether the university itself is formally a party to the arrangement. The obligation to notify the Commonwealth would sit with the university, not with individual researchers, and the rules would distinguish between routine academic engagement and collaborations that warrant scrutiny. That could include substantial or ongoing collaborations or access to non-public research or sensitive technology. It is pleasing to learn that many universities have made clear that they already have systems in place to identify and manage such collaborations. This being the case, requiring notification of a defined class of significant collaborations should not impose an unreasonable additional burden on the university.</para>
<para>The coalition created the Foreign Arrangements Scheme because the Commonwealth needed greater visibility over foreign arrangements. That principle remains sound. We support streamlining this scheme, and we support strengthening it. It is for these reasons that the coalition will support this bill, but we will go one step further and ask the government to come with us. We will seek to strengthen the bill by expanding its scope to include researcher-to-researcher collaborations.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Has the shadow minister moved an amendment?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Ted O'Brien</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No. I'll do that later.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>14</page.no>
        <type>BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rearrangement</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROWLAND</name>
    <name.id>159771</name.id>
    <electorate>Greenway</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the order of the day No. 7, government business, be called on immediately.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>14</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7527" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>14</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026. There's no more fundamental responsibility of government than keeping Australians safe, and that's the standard against which the coalition will judge this bill. The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House.</para>
<para>The bill extends key counterterrorism powers, including control orders, preventive detention orders, post-sentence orders and important police powers, from December 2026 to December 2029. It also changes how serious terrorist offenders are managed after release. It strengthens control orders. It creates new warrant powers. It improves information sharing and it makes other national security amendments. This bill has been referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security for inquiry and report by 6 October. The coalition will examine it closely through that process and pursue any changes that are required to keep Australians safe.</para>
<para>The central powers at the heart of this bill were created by the coalition in government. Control orders and preventive detention orders were established by the Howard government in 2005. Continuing detention orders were established by the coalition in 2016—I think that was the Abbott government. Extended supervision orders were added by the coalition in 2021 under the Morrison government. These powers must not lapse, but their importance makes Labor's delay in bringing them forward for renewal even harder to excuse. Yet again, this parliament is being compelled to consider vital national security law reform under false urgency generated by nothing more than this government's neglect.</para>
<para>Labor knew these powers would expire on 7 December 2026. Labor itself legislated the current sunset date in 2023, and now, in August 2026, with only months remaining, Labor finally brings this legislation to the parliament, only after the coalition called out in June that these powers were set to expire and the parliament was yet to see the bill. Worse still, the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor had already reviewed the post-sentence order regime. That report was tabled on 30 March 2023. When did Labor finally table its formal response? It did so on 12 August 2026, the very same day it introduced this bill, more than three years later. Labor had the review, Labor knew the deadline and Labor sat on it. That's not serious national security administration; it's part of a broader pattern.</para>
<para>Australia's national terrorism threat level remains 'probable'. ASIO has warned that more Australians are being radicalised and radicalised more quickly. Under this government, Australia witnessed the horror of the terrorist attack at Bondi on 14 December last year, where 15 innocent men, women and children were murdered at a Jewish Hanukkah celebration. This threat is real, so Australians are entitled to judge Labor not just by this bill but by its whole national security record.</para>
<para>That record includes Labor's handling of the ISIS linked cohort, which has only increased the number of radicalised people in our community. In October 2022 the Albanese government deliberately repatriated four Australian women and 13 children from a camp in Syria. The government's own announcement said it had repatriated them. At the same time, Labor argued that bringing them back in a planned manner was safer because the Commonwealth could control their re-entry. But by 2025 Labor's position had fundamentally changed. As we were told by the AFP commissioner at Senate estimates, Labor had adopted a new policy of so-called self-managed returns.</para>
<para>In September 2025 two women from the ISIS linked cohort and their four children returned to Australia after making their own way out of Syria. Minister Burke's explanation was that these individuals had got themselves out. The government was not assisting them and was not involved in bringing them out. That became the model repeated on a much larger scale in 2026. Labor needs to explain this contradiction. In 2022 Labor argued that a planned government repatriation was safer because the Commonwealth could control and manage the circumstances of the return. By 2025 and 2026, under its new policy of self-managed returns, its position had effectively become: 'We're not helping them. If they make their own way out, we will deal with them once they arrive.' If NGOs or even other states want to facilitate when and how these terrorist sympathisers and foreign fighters enter Australia, this Labor government has said, 'Well, that's fine.'</para>
<para>What's worse is that it's a terrible pattern of behaviour for this government. Remember that this is the government that decided to use tourist visas to allow in thousands upon thousands of people from Gaza while the war with Israel was going on. Home Affairs records show that 2,127 visas were granted to Palestinian citizens between 7 October 2023 and 31 December 2023 alone. And we wonder why we have an antisemitism crisis in this country. This is Minister Burke's policy. These are tourist visas. Under this government, this minister and this Prime Minister, Labor decided to scrap the usual suite of security checks and allow into this country thousands of people who had just come from a territory that had been under Hamas control for 20 years. Let that sink in. Hamas is an organisation that we in this country have listed as a terrorist organisation for years, yet Labor decided to let thousands of people into this country from a territory that had been run by listed terrorists. Hamas is an organisation that both Labor and the coalition consider to be terrorists—an organisation that deliberately teaches children in its schools to hate Jews and celebrate their murder; an organisation that had just orchestrated the murder, rape and torture of hundreds and hundreds of Jews in Israel.</para>
<para>This government decided to defy years of experience in managing our borders to, in effect, scrap the usual security checks and let thousands of people into this country on tourist visas. Tourist visas are meant for people who are going to come here, visit the country, see the sights and go home. That's not what these people are.</para>
<para>It's not just me saying that. It's also experts like the former Deputy Secretary of the Department of Immigration, Abul Rizvi. It's an extraordinarily weak idea, it's a weak policy, and it was done for domestic political reasons. How do we know that? Because the minister went to the airport and met the people from Gaza. This is not a coherent national security policy. It's not about exercising sovereignty over our borders. It's not helping maintain the social cohesion of this country. It's not governing. Doing nothing is not a strategy.</para>
<para>The Commonwealth should, acting within the law and on national security advice, have the strongest available control over the timing and circumstances in which terrorism-linked people return to this country. Only the Commonwealth should determine when and how these people enter the country, and if third parties want to facilitate that they should do so only with the permission of the Commonwealth. That was the simple premise of the bill the coalition introduced into parliament in March. What did this government do? Did it support this bill? Of course not, because it's the pathology of this incompetent government that they cannot admit when they've made a mistake. And mistakes have been made.</para>
<para>The recent returns raise serious questions. The temporary exclusion order regime was created by the coalition in 2019. It gives the Commonwealth the power, where the statutory threshold is met, to temporarily prevent a terrorism-linked Australian from returning and then to control the timing and the manner of their return and impose conditions through a return permit. In February this year, 34 Australians attempted to leave the Al-Roj camp and make their way back to Australia. Minister Burke issued a temporary exclusion order against one woman in that cohort. He told Australians at that stage that security agencies had not advised him that any other member of the cohort met the required legal thresholds for a temporary exclusion order.</para>
<para>Then, in May, four women and nine children returned to Australia. These women were all arrested on arrival. One was charged with alleged membership of a terrorist organisation and entering or remaining in a declared area. Two were charged with alleged crimes against humanity involving slavery. So Australians are still entitled to ask some very serious questions. What assessments had been undertaken before these people travelled? Why had the temporary exclusion order threshold been met in only one case? What other national security powers were considered? What consideration was given to passport powers? And what was Labor's plan for border control?</para>
<para>The answer cannot simply be that they made their own arrangements. That's why the coalition introduced the Criminal Code Amendment (Keeping Australia Safe) Bill 2026. That bill would have created an offence dealing with the unauthorised organisation or facilitation of the entry into Australia of certain people who'd engaged in terrorism related conduct or who were or had been members of a terrorist organisation. The principle was simple: the Commonwealth, not a third party, should exercise the strongest lawful control available over when and how people in that specified terrorism-linked cohort return. Labor opposed it. Labor voted it down at the second reading. And now Labor tells Australians that the security environment requires stronger counterterrorism laws. Well, we agree. But there's nothing in this bill that creates that offence, nothing that strengthens the temporary exclusion order framework, nothing that resolves the policy failure exposed by self-managed returns.</para>
<para>There's a pattern here. On the ISIS-linked returns, Labor chose passivity. On counterterrorism powers that it knew were expiring, Labor chose delay. Now look at Labor's stance on temporary protection visas. In 2023 Labor created a permanent pathway through the 'resolution of status' visa for eligible existing temporary protection visa holders. Labor itself called it the permanent pathway, and that says everything. Temporary protection visas were designed to do exactly what their name suggests: to provide protection where Australia owed it, without automatically turning temporary protection into permanent settlement. That's the approach that operated under coalition governments—under the government of John Howard, under the government of Tony Abbott, under the government of Malcolm Turnbull and under the government of Scott Morrison. Labor came to office and dismantled it for the existing cohort, replacing temporary protection with a pathway to permanency. The coalition's principle was different: if Australia owes protection, Australia provides protection. But protection didn't automatically mean permanent settlement.</para>
<para>The same pattern appeared elsewhere. Coalition members of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security were calling for action against Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in 2024 and offered support for legislative change, if it was needed. Indeed, when I was shadow attorney-general, I stood at this very dispatch box and said that we would provide whatever support was needed for the government to list the IRGC back in 2022. The state sponsored terrorism framework, however, was not enacted until 2025, after ASIO concluded Iran had directed attacks on Australian soil, three years after we first offered our assistance to help Labor list this terrible terrorist organisation, the IRGC.</para>
<para>Too often on national security Labor moves after delay, after pressure or after the threat has become so much worse. Perhaps nowhere is that more concerning than with the radicalisation of Australia's children. Labor was warned early. In November 2022, the then home affairs minister acknowledged that extremist content online meant people could be radicalised in days and weeks and specifically identified the radicalisation of minors as a significant challenge. In February 2024, Labor held a ministerial summit on youth radicalisation and called it a growing problem. Then, in August 2024, ASIO raised Australia's terrorism threat level back to 'probable' and warned that radicalisation was accelerating and that minors were increasingly embracing violent extremism. But Labor didn't announce a dedicated counterterrorism online centre until May 2026. Yet again, the Labor Party were playing catch-up.</para>
<para>The figures today are deeply, deeply disturbing. The Minister for Home Affairs said in March that, among people currently identified in Australia's countering violent extremism programs, half of the caseload is under the age of 24, 31 per cent is under the age of 18 and eight per cent is aged between 10 and 14. His conclusion was simple. People are getting radicalised younger—10-year-olds, 11-year-olds and 12-year-olds. That should shake this parliament.</para>
<para>The coalition understand that prevention matters and we invested in it. This bill itself reflects the seriousness of youth radicalisation. At present, confirmed control orders for people aged between 14 and 17 are subject to a special three-month maximum. This bill removes that special limit so the general 12-month maximum will apply. The prohibition on orders against a child under 14 remains. The court retains its discretion as to duration, and the requirement that the best interests of a young person be treated as a primary consideration is untouched by this bill. But the policy point is bigger than the legal mechanics. If this parliament is being asked to strengthen control order arrangements for people aged 14 to 17, Labor must also demonstrate that everything being done before a child reaches that point is fit for purpose. Are intervention and deradicalisation programs working? Are they keeping pace with online radicalisation? A control order is at the back end. National security must also stop a 10-, 12- or 14-year-old reaching that point in the first place.</para>
<para>Then there's one significant issue in the bill requiring rigorous scrutiny through the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. Schedule 2 changes how serious terrorist offenders are managed after their sentence. Put simply, the government proposes to move away from renewable extended supervision orders and make control orders the primary mechanism for managing serious terrorist offenders in the community. The existing extended supervision regime can operate for up to three years. It can be renewed where the statutory requirements continue to be satisfied and includes mandatory annual review. The government says operational capability will be preserved. That's fine, but we say, 'Prove it.'</para>
<para>The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security must hear directly from our operational agencies. Which agencies support this change? What happens if a serious terrorist offender continues to present the relevant risk as a control order approaches expiry? What intelligence and surveillance capabilities will be available to support future applications? Schedule 4 creates new warrant powers for exactly that purpose. But, on the face of the new section 6DA of the Surveillance Devices Act and the new section 6UAA of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act, those warrants are available only while the offender is in custody or under a detention order, not once he or she is in the community. Can the AFP and ASIO tell this parliament unequivocally that the new framework gives them every capability they need? That's what matters—capability and keeping Australians safe. The coalition supports extending the essential sunsetting powers to 7 December 2029. We support sensible improvements to control orders, we support sensible improvements to information sharing, and we support sensible improvements to warrant powers, but we will scrutinise this bill through the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security and its processes.</para>
<para>Labor knew these powers were expiring. Labor delayed. Labor had the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor report for more than three years. Labor delayed. Labor repatriated four women and 13 children from Syria in 2022 on the basis that a controlled return was safer and then retreated to self-managed returns for later cohorts. Labor voted down the coalition's legislation dealing with the unauthorised facilitation of specified terrorism linked returns. Labor replaced temporary protection with a pathway to permanency for the existing TPV cohort. Labor was warned about youth radicalisation from 2022, yet the dedicated online counterterrorism centre was not announced until 2026. Too often, Labor has chosen passivity where national security demanded resolve. That's the national security record that the Labor Party has to defend.</para>
<para>If we are serious about national security, every relevant power must be fit for purpose. If we are serious about foreign fighters and terrorism linked returnees, the Commonwealth should have the strongest constitutionally valid powers available to control and manage their return. If we are serious about radicalised Australian children, then prevention, intervention and deradicalisation must be strengthened before we're left to manage the consequences. If we are serious about convicted terrorist offenders, we should never surrender an existing capability unless the government demonstrates that what replaces it keeps Australians at least as safe.</para>
<para>I want to say one additional point about the amendment from the member for Mayo. The coalition supports the amendment of the member for Mayo and the underlying principle. Someone found guilty of actually engaging in a terrorist act should not be able to avoid having a conviction recorded through section 19B. However, the amendment is narrow and deals only with section 101.1. The PJCIS inquiry should examine the broader operation of section 19B across serious Commonwealth terrorism offences. Our support today does not prevent the coalition from pursuing further or broader amendments following that process of scrutiny.</para>
<para>Again, let me say the coalition will not oppose the bill in this House. We will scrutinise the bill through the processes available to us—through the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. We will hear from the agencies. We will test the government's claims. Where the evidence shows that changes are needed to make and keep Australians safe, the coalition will pursue them. There should be one test only: whatever keeps Australians safest. The first responsibility of government and of all of us in this place is the safety and security of the Australian people.</para>
<para>The coalition created many of the powers before this House. We strengthened them as the threat evolved, and we will fight to ensure Australia's counterterrorism laws remain strong enough for the threats we face today. On the safety of Australians, we will never, ever compromise.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7523" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>17</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In rising to speak on the Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2026, I can inform the House that the coalition will oppose this bill. This legislation proposes yet another increase in Australia's passenger movement charge, the nation's departure tax, from $70 to $80 for the vast bulk of passengers departing Australia by air or sea. The increase is scheduled to take effect from 1 January 2027 and therefore comes only 2½ years after the last increase in the passenger movement charge. If this bill passes, the passenger movement charge will have risen from $60 to $80 between June 2024 and January 2027. In other words, that is an increase of around 33 per cent in little more than 2½ years. At a time when our tourism industry continues to work extremely hard to maintain its international competitiveness, the Albanese government has simply not made the case for why another increase of this magnitude is necessary.</para>
<para>The passenger movement charge has existed in one form or another since 1978, when the original departure tax, as it was then called, was introduced at a level of $10. It became the passenger movement charge in 1995. Over the decades since, there have been a number of increases and, on one isolated occasion, a decrease. But the question for the parliament today is not whether the passenger movement charge should exist, nor is it whether the rate can or should be adjusted. The question is whether this government has made the case for this particular increase at this particular time, and the coalition believes it has not. The government expects the measure to raise an additional $745 million over the forward estimates, and that's a significant amount of money. But the additional revenue for the Commonwealth is not by itself a sufficient justification for imposing another tax increase on Australians and on our visitor economy. And the government has not established a sufficiently clear connection between this additional revenue and improved services for the people who will actually pay the charge.</para>
<para>The tourism, aviation, airport and cruise sectors have consistently argued that a greater share of passenger movement charge revenue should be reinvested in the infrastructure and services that support the movement of passengers across our border. That includes enhancements such as more smart gates, better border technology, improved investment in airport and border infrastructure and more appropriate resourcing for the Australian Border Force. Yet this bill provides no guarantee that the additional revenue will be directed towards any of those ends. Passengers are being asked to pay more, but there is no corresponding commitment from the government that they will see improved border processing or passenger facilitation as a result. I think that's a very legitimate and very widespread concern.</para>
<para>The government's process in bringing forward this increase has also been poor. Key aviation and tourism stakeholders have said they were not meaningfully consulted, and that is particularly concerning given the practical consequences of the commencement date. Airlines were already selling tickets for travel after 1 January 2027, before this legislation had been passed, and that creates a foreseeable implementation problem. Carriers cannot simply collect a higher statutory charge before that higher charge has become law. The government knew, or certainly should have known, that airlines sell international tickets many months in advance. This was entirely predictable, yet the industry has been left to deal with the consequences of a compressed implementation timetable that stands in contrast to the substantially greater notice that accompanied the previous increase. This is not a theoretical concern. It affects airlines, travel agents, booking systems and ultimately passengers, who should also reasonably expect to know the full cost of a ticket when they purchase it. Better consultation and better planning could have avoided this situation.</para>
<para>Very understandably and justifiably in these circumstances, industry reaction to this measure has been overwhelmingly critical. The Australian Airports Association, for one, has expressed disappointment about the increase and has warned about the impact on price-sensitive travellers and on Australia's tourism competitiveness. It has also made the very reasonable point that, if passengers are required to pay more, additional revenue should be invested in tangible improvements at the border. The Board of Airline Representatives of Australia has also criticised both the increase and the lack of consultation. Airlines are already dealing with elevated fuel and operating costs, and this measure adds yet another cost to international travel. The Tourism and Transport Forum and Cruise Lines International Association Australasia have also raised concerns about the effect on Australia's tourism competitiveness. More specifically, the Tourism and Transport Forum has argued that the industry was blindsided and not properly consulted and that this measure makes Australia more expensive both for international visitors and for Australians travelling overseas. Those concerns deserve to be taken seriously and, indeed, the coalition has done so in reaching the position that this bill should be opposed.</para>
<para>Tourism is an extraordinarily important part of the Australian economy. It supports businesses and jobs across metropolitan, regional and remote Australia. International aviation connects Australian businesses with global markets and connects Australian families with the world. The government should be looking for ways to make Australia more competitive as a destination, not lazily treating travellers as an easy source of additional revenue.</para>
<para>It is true that some stakeholders have expressed a more nuanced view about the direct effect of an additional $10 on overall travel volumes, and it is fair to acknowledge that. However, even those voices have reinforced the broader argument that Passenger Movement Charge revenue should be reinvested in tourism and border infrastructure. That is a recurring theme across the sector and across the community, and the government has not adequately responded to it.</para>
<para>The coalition's position is therefore straightforward. We do not oppose changes to the Passenger Movement Charge as a matter of principle. We supported the 2024 increase in circumstances where the charge had been unchanged for seven years and the increase broadly reflected accumulated inflation. We went to the 2025 election with a policy for predictable CPI indexation. But this bill is different. To recap what I said earlier, it imposes another $10 increase after a period of only 2½ years. It lifts the PMC by 14.3 per cent in one step. It goes well beyond CPI growth over the relevant period. This would all mean, if the bill is passed, that the charge had increased by a third between June 2024 and January 2027.</para>
<para>The government also failed to provide a sufficiently compelling policy justification for that increase. It has failed to meaningfully consult key sectors before putting them in the position of having to manage a rushed implementation and has failed to guarantee that the additional revenue will be reinvested in the border infrastructure, technology and services, for which passengers and industry are asking.</para>
<para>Australians are already paying enough. Our tourism and aviation sectors already face significant cost pressures, and simply that it will raise another $745 million for the Commonwealth in the form of a desperate tax grab to try to offset some of the many disastrous budgetary decisions by the Labor Party is certainly not sufficient reason to wave through another substantial increase in a tax on international travel. For all those reasons and many more, and especially in acknowledgement of the position of the tourism and transport sectors on this legislation, the coalition will oppose the Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2026, and I commend that position to the parliament.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7501" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>19</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The universities accord drew on more than 820 public submissions and set out a plan to change those figures. The Albanese Labor government has acted on more than 30 of its 47 recommendations in full or in part. We made Commonwealth supported university places demand driven for all First Nations students who meet the entry requirements. We created the National Student Ombudsman and a national code for universities to prevent and respond to gender based violence. We expanded free university preparation courses, opened new suburban and regional study hubs, expanded Commonwealth paid prac and established the Australian Tertiary Education Commission.</para>
<para>We have also reduced the cost of gaining a qualification. We cut HELP and other student loan balances by 20 per cent. Nationally, that removed more than $16 billion from the debts of more than three million Australians. In Griffith, almost 32,000 people have a HECS debt, and, thanks to Labor's reforms, they received an average cut of $6,392 each. We've also capped annual indexation at the lower of inflation or wage growth, lifted the repayment threshold and introduced a fairer marginal repayment system. For someone earning $70,000, compulsory repayments have fallen by around $1,300 a year. That is real relief for young workers managing rent, groceries and other daily costs while building their careers.</para>
<para>Marcia, a West End local, told me why she took on a large debt to study psychology. She wants to help people, especially those doing it tough. One of her sisters became a teacher because she wanted to support the next generation. They did not choose those paths for the money. They chose them because they care. Marcia said cutting student debt and lifting the repayment threshold recognised working-class people who gain an education and give back through their work.</para>
<para>Her words capture the values behind these reforms. If we ask people to train for jobs our communities need, we should make it possible for them to complete that training without carrying an unfair burden. These measures make it easier to enter tertiary education, complete a placement and manage the cost after graduation.</para>
<para>This bill now reforms the funding beneath the university system itself. Under managed growth funding, the Minister for Education will set the total pool of fully funded Commonwealth supported places. The independent Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, will allocate those places to universities and other eligible providers. Each provider will receive a core student load and a growth allocation—the core protects its funded base. The growth allocation allows ATEC to direct new places towards students and communities with the greatest need.</para>
<para>The new system will add 16,000 places in each of the next three years. From 2030, it will add 19,000 places each year. If demand from low-income or regional students exceeds the national pool, ATEC can ask the minister to increase it. This gives the system a way to respond when more eligible students seek a place. The change also includes a transition period for providers. Universities with lower enrolments can access a temporary funding floor through to the end of 2031.</para>
<para>For 2027, ATEC expects to allocate about 20,000 more Commonwealth supported places to universities that currently teach students without the matching Commonwealth contribution. This gives universities greater funding certainty. It also gives capable students a clearer promise. If they meet the entry standard, the system should have a funded place ready for them.</para>
<para>More places will get students through the university gate, and needs based funding will help them stay. Universities will receive extra funding for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students at regional campuses. The funding will follow the student. The more eligible students that a university enrols, the more support it receives. The bill sets a base equity payment of $1,535 per student and a base regional payment of $1,398. Both amounts will rise with indexation each year. Under earlier programs, universities received an average of about $600 per eligible student—last year. The new base payments will more than double that amount in some cases. Universities can use the funding for tutoring, mentoring, academic support, scholarships and emergency grants. Regional providers can meet the higher costs of delivering courses across longer distances and smaller campuses.</para>
<para>That support can take many forms. It could provide a tutor for a first-year student who has fallen behind. It could pay an emergency grant that keeps a student housed through a family crisis. It could connect a first-in-family student with a mentor who helps them understand university life. These are practical supports, but their effect can be profound. One timely grant can stop a student from withdrawing. One trusted mentor can help someone believe that they belong. Financial access creates opportunity. Steady and personal support helps turn that opportunity into a qualification.</para>
<para>I am of Labor because I believe in the primacy of education and its power to transform lives. As a qualified secondary-school teacher and a mother to two young boys, I know education is the key to every single Australian's future. As our Minister for Education said, 'It is the great equaliser in an unequal world.' I believe in the importance of civics education and media literacy, in upholding our democracy and in the importance of teachers to our learning outcomes. Whatever school a family chooses, their child deserves the best education Australia can offer. The Australians who will shape our country in 2050 are sitting in our classrooms today. Somewhere in Australia today is a student who could become an outstanding nurse, engineer, teacher or filmmaker. They may live in a regional town, face financial pressure or become the first in their family to attend university. Our responsibility is to ensure opportunity reaches them to unlock their potential.</para>
<para>Reaching the accord's target of 80 per cent tertiary attainment by 2050 starts with the investments that we make now. This bill invests another $3.6 billion in higher education over the next decade. It will fund an estimated 230,000 additional commencing university students. It will create more places and give students stronger support to complete their studies. Education gives people the skills to build secure lives and serve their communities. I have seen this time and again through the many years of my career. It gives Australia the teachers, nurses, engineers, carers and other skilled workers it will need. The decisions we make in this parliament will shape the choices available to children who have not yet even started school. We should want every one of those children to grow up knowing that their ability will be recognised, their work will be rewarded and the doors of opportunity will be open to them.</para>
<para>Australia's future will be built by the people that we educate today. This bill invests in their education, in their potential and in the opportunities open to every generation that follows.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak to the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. I acknowledge that managed growth was a recommendation of the Universities Accord, but I am cautious about measures in this bill not because there isn't a problem to solve but because it creates a centralised model and places unprecedented responsibilities with the minister and the Australian Tertiary Education Commission. I support the amendments proposed by the member for Curtin, formed by the universities themselves. These amendments would moderate the powers given to ATEC and the minister, striking, I believe, a better balance between stewardship and central control. I note that it is on the basis of these amendments being adopted that the sector has broadly given qualified support for this bill. But, once again, it's very disappointing that this House is being asked to speak to and likely vote on this bill before we've had a chance to review the outcomes of the Senate inquiry.</para>
<para>Australia's higher education sector is a world leader. Nine of our universities rank in the world's top 100. Each year, more than 200,000 international students choose to study here—many more apply than we take—making it our largest export that we don't dig out of the ground. Nearly 400,000 domestic students also start a degree each year. This sector has given us solar-power breakthroughs, world-class quantum research and unicorns like Atlassian. But I believe it is not on the right track, and many are concerned about its licence.</para>
<para>At some universities, international students now outnumber domestic students two to one. Job-ready Graduates, a failed policy, means many students pay more than they did a decade ago for certain degrees. From 2027, students in the highest pay band will pay $56,000 for a degree, and it will take many more of them more than a decade to pay it off. What are they getting for that money? Many class sizes are growing, teaching is increasingly casualised, student satisfaction is falling, employers are telling us their graduates aren't work ready and firms like the big four major law firms are cutting graduate intakes as AI takes over junior roles. It is no wonder that students and parents are asking, 'Is university really worth it?' On top of this, governance failures and a poor record on student safety and inclusion in recent years have further eroded public trust.</para>
<para>The Universities Accord sets out to address the sector's sustainability. It set a target of having 80 per cent of working-age Australians with a tertiary qualification by 2050, 55 per cent of those with a university degree. That means doubling the capacity from 860,000 university places today to 1.5 million by 2050. The accord's answer was managed growth—central coordination to stop universities scrambling for enrolments in a race to the bottom. To be fair to the universities, some of this scramble isn't their fault; it's a consequence of incentives. Job-ready Graduates rewards exactly the wrong behaviour. Arts, commerce and law are less capital intensive and relatively easy to scale. As a result of this failed policy, they also happen to attract the highest student fees. For years, the government has asked for more of universities while funding them less per student, pushing them to lean on international fees to make up the difference. Most people in the sector accept that something needs to change. But the question, really, for this bill right now is: does it set us up for the changes that this sector needs to make?</para>
<para>There are three main things in this bill: it changes how universities are funded, from a capped grant to a system based on total student numbers, with the minister able to set or lift the total allocation pool; it gives the minister the power to cap international student numbers; and it legislates needs based funding for low-income, First Nations and regional students. The old cap system let universities manage their own intake, make early offers and absorb surprise demand without second-guessing the funding consequences. Yes, it let arts and commerce degrees overexpand, but it also gave universities room to move and room to innovate. This bill removes that room. Andrew Norton put it this way:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Policies introducing both greater bureaucratic control and enrolment growth seem to be at least partially contradictory.</para></quote>
<para>He expects total enrolments will still grow, just not as much as they could under a more flexible system.</para>
<para>This model asks the minister to forecast course-by-course demand six months out, locking in allocations every June. Norton warns that this will lead to a rush of revisions over the Christmas holidays as we adjust for realised demand.</para>
<para>Handing the minister power over the total allocation pool, with ATEC deciding how it's split between the universities, risks student choice too. If Jobs-ready Graduates taught us anything, it's that students don't easily switch preferences just because of a signal from government. Our universities aren't viewed as perfect substitutes, and nor should they be. I understand that we don't want overflowing classes in metropolitan areas at the expense of the regions, but we do want universities competing on quality, not resting on guaranteed allocation.</para>
<para>This is probably my greatest concern about the bill—in this direction. I want to see greater innovation in the university sector, I want to see greater competition between the universities to provide outcomes for students through the education that sets them up and I want to see the universities compete on that. I think that is more important now than ever, particularly with the development of AI and how that is going to influence the workforce. This innovation in the university sector is more important than ever. I am concerned about elements of this bill that take away some of the incentive to innovate and the incentive to differentiate, which I think should be part of the overall strategy for the universities. I think there are other ways that the government could be thinking about this, including addressing issues such as the breadth of courses or the breadth of research that every single university needs to provide. I don't know that that is necessarily appropriate. Greater specialisation in our universities could be a significant opportunity for our university sector to seek excellence in particular areas, rather than having to have broader responsibilities across a breadth of areas. That is the concern I have in terms of where this government is going. I understand the rationale, but the question, really, is: are we going to drive a university sector that competes to be the best in the world for its students and for research, using some of this piece?</para>
<para>The second piece is about international students. Again, this bill gives the minister the power to set the international-student allocation pool, with ATEC deciding how it is divided. I believe we need a more evidence based approach to international students across the board. It's not just applicable to the university sector; it also applies very much to TAFE and other sectors.</para>
<para>The issue I have is that the government has failed to put forward a comprehensive migration strategy. It has failed to talk to the Australian community about where it is expecting our migration and our population to go over time, where it's going to come from, and to build the social licence about the choices that it is making. That is true also in the international student space. I do have concerns about the department or the minister having control of these areas when we are completely missing a broader narrative that the Australian population is willing to back around where our migration system is going.</para>
<para>Finally, it comes to needs based funding, which is a part of the bill that I support. The accord was clear. Lifting attainment means making universities genuinely accessible to everyone. The bill legislates needs based funding for regional, First Nations and low SES students. That is welcome, and I support that without reservation. But more is needed. The accord also flagged that student income support has been eroded by the cost of living faster than almost any other safety net. I understand the budget pressures this government is under. I simply ask that this one stays on the agenda as unfinished business alongside the overdue overhaul of the Job-Ready Graduates scheme as well.</para>
<para>I want to see a university sector that prepares students for work while respecting their right to choose their own path. I want universities to compete and to specialise rather than all offering the same homogeneous experience. I want to see a sector that works far more closely with industry, with more work integrated learning for students and real recognition for academics who engage in public policy and businesses through consulting, not just those who publish the most papers.</para>
<para>We have an issue of productivity in this country. We have excellent research in our universities, and we are failing, in some cases, in that translation. I think that part of the problem is the silo that universities operate in compared to the business world and other parts of our economy. We should be doing everything we can to deepen those connections between universities and other parts of our economy.</para>
<para>I will join the chorus of critics arguing that this system needs reform, but this bill points towards a model that is heavily centralised, potentially anti-competitive and, in some places, self-contradictory. It leaves issues on the table, including the failed Job-Ready Graduates scheme, and I don't see enough here to convince me that the long list of problems that we are all aware of in the university sector will be fixed through this model. I urge the government to consider the member for Curtin's amendments to this bill, principally seeking to increase oversight of ministerial decisions, given the unprecedented powers, and preserve the autonomy of universities and higher education providers to do what they think is going to make the best difference to their students.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to speak in support of the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. I am surprised to see how few speakers on this bill are from Liberal and National Party electorates in regional and rural areas. This is the sort of bill that would help people in the communities that they represent, like regional Queensland, who struggle to get to university and who really need their regional universities funded better, and would help make sure that those kids get every opportunity in life. I'm very surprised that there are so few speakers from the conservative side of politics speaking on this legislation.</para>
<para>Labor governments have always been about opening the doors of opportunity. I grew up in a working-class family in Ipswich. My dad was a cleaner at a meatworks, and my mum was a shop assistant. I was the first person directly in my family ever to go to high school, let alone university. It was the teachers in year 12 at Bundamba State Secondary College which gave me the aspiration, the inspiration and the opportunity to go to university. I'm the first person from my high school to ever study law at university. I would not be here today in this place if not for the interest and support of my teachers and for the opportunities given to me, a working-class boy from Trumper Street in East Ipswich, at the back of a flood affected house, in the back of a school in a battling suburb in Ipswich. Education raised my expectations. It gave me a chance to be in this place. It gave me a chance to build, along with, at first, my fellow business partners and then my fellow directors and shareholders, a multimillion-dollar business as a lawyer in the Brisbane CBD.</para>
<para>Education changes lives, and it certainly changed mine. Education lifts people up, including kids in regional and rural communities and in working-class communities like the one I grew up in Ipswich. On the night of the last election, the Prime Minister talked about how Labor governments opened the door of opportunity and how this government will open it just a bit more. And that's what this bill is about—opening the doors of opportunity wider for more Australians.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government has introduced this legislation to help more Australians get to and through university. The bill makes two major reforms to our university system and how we fund our universities—not for us. Australian workplace agreements and Work Choices and the defunding of universities, should those universities not take up that pernicious system of Work Choices, were inflicted upon us by those opposite back in the Howard days. We have a different approach to universities. If the member for Wentworth is unhappy about our more centralised approach, I believe government has a role to play in public policy to drive the university sector and drive education to make sure it's available to everyone, not just in wealthy electorates but in regional and rural electorates like mine.</para>
<para>Firstly, this bill establishes a managed growth fund to build a bigger and better and fairer education system that gives more Australians the chance to go to university. Secondly, it puts in place needs based funding so young people from disadvantaged backgrounds will get the support they need to succeed at university.</para>
<para>This is the seventh piece of legislation introduced by our government to implement the universities accord. It's part of a broader response to that accord, and it means an extra $3.6 billion in funding for universities over the next decade. Specifically, what has it done? Firstly, on managed growth funding, this year more students are starting university, and we're building on that by funding more university places. Over the next three years, there will be an additional 16,000 places for students in the system each year. From 2030, this will increase to 19,000 additional places each year. Over the next decade, we expect an additional 230,000 students commencing university studies. We're funding that growth and giving the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, or ATEC, the tools to manage it.</para>
<para>As part of this bill, the government will set the total number of Commonwealth supported places, and ATEC will allocate those places to universities. We think that's the best approach, not a situation of competition like the member for Wentworth talked about. The ATEC will also have the power to allocate additional places where it thinks they are needed to meet the demands from students from disadvantaged backgrounds and from regional and remote communities. That's why it bewilders me that there are not enough and not more speakers from conservative regional and rural communities across Queensland and elsewhere speaking on this bill. This bill will effectively mean places for those students will now be uncapped.</para>
<para>Moving on to needs based funding, we know the Gonski model for student funding in primary schools and secondary schools provides schools with extra funding based on where they are located and the needs of the students they educate. Students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds receive additional support and so do schools in regional and remote communities. The Minister for Education put it well, I think, when he said this bill is like Gonski for universities. I agree. Universities will receive more funding as they enrol more students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses. At the end of the day, if you get the marks and you've got the skills, you've got what it takes. You deserve a place. I think that's the Australian way. These reforms mean we'll guarantee you a Commonwealth supported place, and we'll make sure you get the support you need when you get there.</para>
<para>This is similar to the reforms we're implementing to fix the funding of our schools, as well as tying those reforms to help more kids finish high school and then go to university or TAFE. Needs based funding will provide universities with additional resources for tutoring, mentoring, academic assistance, scholarships and emergency financial support for those students. That's important because we know that kids from regional Australia, kids from disadvantaged backgrounds, are about twice as likely as other students to drop out of university in the first year at university.</para>
<para>What does this mean in practice for those kids from disadvantaged backgrounds? Whether they grow up in Ipswich or Esk in my electorate of Blair, for example, it will more than double the amount of funding to help them finish their degree—with things like extra academic support, tutoring and mentoring—from $600 a student to more than $1,500. The bill sets out the base equity amount of $1,535 and the base regional support at $1,398, with both amounts indexed each year. Guidelines will set out how the base amount is to be applied to each student based on which cohort they're in.</para>
<para>In addition, the bill sets out a framework for the ATEC to exercise its existing function to allocate international student places where the Minister for Education makes an international allocation pool determination, something that those opposite have steadfastly opposed. It also makes small technical amendments to modernise information sharing between the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency and ATEC to inform their work as appropriate.</para>
<para>Specifically, the bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and other acts. First, it will embed a new managed growth funding system to support growth in domestic students—in particular, those from low-socioeconomic backgrounds and regional and remote communities. Second, the bill will establish demand driven, needs based funding to support students from those backgrounds. And, third, it will formalise the role of ATEC in allocating Commonwealth supported places to higher education providers. In addition, it sets out a framework for ATEC to exercise its existing functions. It's worth noting these critical structural reforms have been the subject of extensive stakeholder consultation, and universities and peak bodies have indicated they're supportive of the new model. And why wouldn't they be?</para>
<para>We know that under Bob Hawke and Paul Keating the number of Australians finishing high school jumped from around 40 per cent to almost 80 per cent, which was nation building in terms of our economy and in terms of equity. These reforms are the next step in our efforts to build Australia's human capital. The universities accord set a target that, by 2050, 80 per cent of the workforce will have a TAFE qualification or a university degree. The only way to do this is to break down the barriers that stop many young people getting to university, certainly from regional and rural communities and from low-socioeconomic backgrounds. The talent is there, but the opportunity is not. As a nation, we need to build capacity and spread opportunity across the country. We need to do more to guard against the 'tyranny of low expectations', as former prime minister and education minister Julia Gillard put it, and to ensure every school leaver in this country is given the tools for success in life.</para>
<para>These reforms build on the Bradley review reforms that Julia Gillard put in place during her time in government, and they will mean more young people from poorer families and from the regions and the bush get a crack at university. We want to significantly increase the number of university students from areas in the outer suburbs and the regions—for example, in my electorate, around Ipswich and the Somerset Region. We're already well served by two university campuses in my electorate via the University of Southern Queensland, or UniSQ, as it's commonly called. There's one at Ipswich and one at Springfield. I congratulate UniSQ on their 20-year anniversary for their Springfield campus. I attended a wonderful celebration for that on Saturday.</para>
<para>Both campuses have done so much to improve access to education in the fast-growing Ipswich region and beyond, in Logan and in the regional areas such as the Scenic Rim, the Somerset Region and the Lockyer Valley. The University of Southern Queensland is contributing to our economic development and our local workforce needs. Indeed it is contributing in your electorate too, Deputy Speaker Buchholz, in the Lockyer Valley. With University of Southern Queensland campuses in Toowoomba at one end and in Ipswich and Springfield, that whole corridor is well served. It means that young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and from regional and rural communities can get the opportunity to go to university. Why? Because they can see the campuses there. They can see the opportunity and they can seize that opportunity—not just see it but seize it. That's really crucial for kids from the Somerset Region, from the Lockyer Valley, from the Scenic Rim and from Ipswich because they are disadvantaged. There is no doubt they're disadvantaged.</para>
<para>Establishing that campus at Springfield was so critical. It's an integral part of the greater Springfield area. Establishing it was the vision of Bob Sharpless and Maha Sinnathamby. I congratulate both of them for the work they've done in establishing Springfield City Group's education city vision. It really has grown in line with the master planned community, bringing together education, industry, health and civic life. I dropped in to the Ipswich campus of UniSQ the other day to talk to some of their allied health students about the government's announcement that we're expanding paid prac to 10 additional courses like physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech pathology and pharmacy. That is on top of the cuts to student debt that we've done, which were so popular in the last campaign, I might add.</para>
<para>The students were very happy with the government providing real cost-of-living relief and helping them train for some of the most important jobs in our country and especially our region. I think it's fantastic, by the way, that there's a health focus at the University of Southern Queensland Ipswich campus, and I commend them for their interest in establishing there a centre for palliative care with Ipswich Hospice so that allied health students, medical students and the like can train from that campus in palliative care. What a great initiative. I commend it. It's something that I'll be fighting for in terms of funding, and I know this is very important from my local community as it's so fast growing.</para>
<para>Now, we don't want to be a country where your chances in life depend on how rich your parents are or we happen to live. Certainly, I grew up in a tough background and a tough environment, but education offered me the opportunity to get ahead in life. We don't want to be in a situation where your race, your religion, your location or your postcode dictate your chances in life. That's not what we want to be as a country. We want to be a country that believes in the fair go. Legislation like this is what this is about. It's about what we hope to achieve, what we as a country believe is important. It's no good criticising and nitpicking if you come from a rich area. People who come from the big capital cities at times don't understand how tough it is in regional areas.</para>
<para>For universities, the idea of going to university, if you're a kid growing up in Toogoolawah, is a massive change in life. If you're living in Laidley, Boonah or Esk, it is a huge change. You have to uproot yourself to go to university. It is a major, major change. Legislation like this will majorly affect them and, importantly, assist them. It will mean that those universities will have greater opportunity to offer courses and more funding to assist those students. It will mean more students and more funding. This is a big structural reform. It will build a bigger, better and fairer higher education system. It will change lives and it will change the country.</para>
<para>I thank the minister. He made the point that almost 50 per cent of young Australians in their 30s today have university degrees. That is not the case in my community, and we need it to be. I want a time when a kid who lives in Ipswich or a kid who lives in Kilcoy aspires to university and gets that chance. Bills like this and funding like this will make a difference.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. I support the central purpose of this bill—to give more Australians the opportunity to attend university and to give students from disadvantaged backgrounds the support they need to succeed once they get there. Our most valuable national asset is our people and training and educating Australians must be at the centre of any serious plans to improve productivity, fill critical skills shortages and build the industries and the Australia that we need and want. The Australian Universities Accord makes the scale of that task clear. By 2050, at least 80 per cent of Australia's workforce will need a university or vocational qualification, up from around 60 per cent from the accord report. Today, close to half of Australians in their 30s have a university degree, but the rate is roughly half that for people from low-income families and regional communities. Talent is not confined to particular postcodes, families or schools. Opportunities should not be either.</para>
<para>This bill is an important step towards a larger and fairer system, and I commend the government for progressing it, but it must create a funding and governance system that is fair, transparent, durable and protected from political misuse regardless of who occupies the ministerial office or government. Under the new managed-growth funding system, the minister will set a total allocation pool and the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, will allocate core and additional growth places to universities and other eligible providers. The government expects this model to support an additional 230,000 places for commencing university students over the next decade, backed by an additional $3.6 billion in funding. The bill also establishes need based funding for universities enrolling students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses. These are welcome reforms. I also welcome the greater long-term coordination through ATEC and mission based compacts. Australia needs an expert body that can take a national view of workforce needs, regional access, course capacity and financial sustainability.</para>
<para>My central concern with this bill is whether it gets the power balance right between the discretion of the minister, ATEC and individual providers and universities. Government has a legitimate role in setting national priorities and ensuring public funding delivers public value. Universities must be accountable for quality, access, student safety and responsible financial management. But stewardship is not control, and I am concerned at the overreach that's being provided to the minister here.</para>
<para>Universities need the autonomy to fulfil their mission, teach and conduct research, invest in capability and respond to their communities without the overreach of the minister. This autonomy protects free inquiry, research integrity and the ability to challenge conventional wisdom. Questions remain among Australia's tertiary sector as to whether this bill gets that balance right. The concern is that this bill will allow the minister to impose additional funding conditions on an individual university outside the mission based compact process. Those conditions would be separate from and additional to the mission based compact process. This is a broad and opaque power that could overlap with ATEC's responsibilities.</para>
<para>ATEC was established as the expert statutory steward of the system, responsible for negotiating mission based compacts and allocating most Commonwealth supported places. Separate ministerial conditions could cut across that work and, we know, could way too quickly become politicised. The government may say the current minister would use this power responsibly—fair enough. But that's not the test that parliament should be applying. The test is not whether the current minister would exercise the power responsibly. Parliament must legislate for every future minister and possible government, and we must ensure that there is that proper separation and not an overreach of ministerial power. I simply don't support the government being so involved in the day-to-day operation of our tertiary sector. Higher education expert Andrew Norton has warned that establishing the legal limits of this power may require universities to take the government to court, something they may be reluctant to do while relying heavily on government funding. It would also be such a waste of resources and funds.</para>
<para>The bill lets the minister set the overall national pool, and ATEC allocates places between institutions. As an expert statutory body, ATEC can consider each provider's capacity, regional role, financial sustainability, student demand and contribution to Australia's skill needs. But decisions about how an institution distributes its allocation across particular courses should remain with that institution. This should not be subject to ministerial overreach. The bill does not clearly prevent the minister or ATEC from making allocations at a course, field of study or other subprovider level. It doesn't take Einstein to see the concern that, if a minister or ATEC reaches right down to the allocation of courses, field of study or other provider level, a government of the day with a particular ideology or view in relation to certain areas can absolutely then use the lever of funding and allocations to reach into and predetermine these areas.</para>
<para>My amendment, which I will be discussing with the minister, therefore draws a clear boundary. Government may determine the national total and ATEC may allocate places between providers, but universities must retain the responsibility for the mix of their own courses. Neither the minister nor ATEC should be deciding how many international students an individual university may enrol in a particular course. Course level controls would intrude directly into academic decision-making and prevent universities from responding flexibly to student preferences and changing workforce needs. We have seen the impact of such decisions in the Job-ready Graduates scheme for domestic students, a horrendous program that the government has yet to remedy despite being in government now for four years.</para>
<para>The bill nevertheless gives the minister broad power to prescribe matters that ATEC must follow or consider when allocating international student places. Without adequate limits, that power could be used to target a particular institution or influence a number of students enrolled in a particular course. Course level controls are contrary to institutional autonomy and would undermine universities' ability to respond to student preferences in place based planning. Canberra should not micromanage what individual universities teach.</para>
<para>Universities Australia has warned that the interaction between the bill's course designation powers and ATEC allocations could weaken the existing protections for continuing CSP students. Although ATEC must consider a provider's capacity to meet its continuing student obligations, the bill should put the matter beyond doubt. A subsequent designation or allocation decision must not remove the CSP status of a student who has already commenced their course. The course selection of enrolled students must be protected and respected. I really urge the government to clarify this question. No student who begins a course in a Commonwealth supported place should lose that status part way through their degree because a minister has later designated the course differently or because ATEC changes a provider's allocation. Students plan their lives and finances on the offer they accept. Government policy should not move the floor beneath them midway through their studies.</para>
<para>The bill's needs based funding model has the potential to become one of the most important legacies of the accord, but success can't be measured by enrolment numbers alone. It should be measured by whether underrepresented students are actually supported to access university, remain engaged and ultimately graduate. That work begins long before a student arrives on campus. Universities need to work with schools, families and communities to build aspiration, explain pathways and help prospective students seek higher education as a realistic option.</para>
<para>The 2050 Alliance has rightly argued that needs based funding and outreach should not operate as disconnected programs. Both serve the same objective, increasing participation among communities that remain underrepresented in higher education. The amendments that I will propose will allow ATEC to publish an institutional equity strategy aimed at widening access for Indigenous students, students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and other equity cohorts recognised in the needs based funding guidelines. Universities could use funding received under this part of the bill to undertake activities implementing that strategy, including appropriate pre-enrolment outreach. This would give providers greater flexibility to invest in coordinated, evidence based and multiyear programs, instead of treating outreach and enrolled student support as entirely separate tasks. You don't get to an enrolment just by accident; we need to have that outreach program as well. We will not close participation gaps by waiting until a student arrives on campus or assuming that they're just going to make their way from disadvantaged or remote and regional areas to an enrolment in a campus. The outreach program is important. We must build the pipeline well before that point and then support students all the way through to graduation.</para>
<para>Finally, this bill must not be presented as a completion of the Universities Accord agenda. The JobReady Graduates scheme continues to distort student contributions and punish students for choosing particular fields of study. I voted against it when it was presented as legislation under the Morrison government in the 46th Parliament. I continue to urge the government—it's been four years—to repeal it and fix this broken system. The JobReady Graduates package doubled the fees for arts, humanities and social work and attempted to pick winners by using student debt as a behavioural lever.</para>
<para>From 2027, students in the highest contribution band are now expected to pay more than $55,000 for a standard three-year degree. That is insane. A country that claims to value critical thinking, communication, culture, social work and public service should not price those disciplines as though they are indulgences. They remain core to the workforce and the skills matrix that we need for the future. The government's 20 per cent student debt reduction and HELP repayment changes were meaningful and welcome, but the underlying JobReady Graduate structure remains. A university education should challenge a student intellectually, not cripple them financially.</para>
<para>The ambition behind this bill is worthy and urgent. Australia needs more skilled people and a higher education system that reaches talented students locked out by geography, disadvantage or circumstances. Managed growth funding and needs based funding can help deliver that, but opening the doors of opportunity must not also open the door to ministerial interference. The minister can set national direction, ATEC can independently make provider level allocations and negotiate mission based compacts, but universities should remain autonomous institutions accountable under clear and transparent law. Students must have certainty that the place they begin in when they commence their study is the place they can complete, and the bill can open the doors to opportunity wider. We must build a system that is strong enough, fair enough and independent enough to keep those doors open for generations to come and make sure that it is immunised from political interference.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In my first speech in this place, I shared how I am forever grateful for the education—the keys to the kingdom, as Paul Keating put it—that I received and acknowledged that education changes lives. It changed mine, and it changes so many lives for people right across communities in this country. I've also previously acknowledged the transformative impact that education has had right across Australia, particularly higher education. Those words that I shared in 2022, when I first came to this place, including the words around my passion and strong conviction for ensuring we have a robust and independent higher education system, were true then, and they are still true today. We need a higher education system that values and fosters intellectual curiosity and supports people to think, to create new ideas and to ask the tough questions. That's the kind of higher education system that is essential to the future of Australia.</para>
<para>I'm really proud to stand on this side of the House and be part of an Albanese Labor government that absolutely values higher education. I've said in this place before that, when you value something, you invest in it, and Labor has taken our responsibility seriously when it comes to investing in higher education. It's why our Labor government got on with future-proofing our higher education system as soon as we had the opportunity to do so upon forming government. We wasted no time at all. Led by Minister Clare, our government got to work.</para>
<para>The Australian Universities Accord was the biggest and broadest review of higher education in Australia in almost 20 years, and, through the accord, we undertook a top-to-bottom review of Australia's higher education system. Led by Professor Mary O'Kane AC, we engaged a panel of eminent Australians. Collectively, the panel represented some of the sharpest minds in this country, bringing a depth and breadth of experience throughout higher education that would be the envy of the world, as well as being well placed to make recommendations about the future of our system. In November 2022, Minister Clare charged the panel with conducting a review to drive lasting reform in our higher education system. This is reform that would deliver a higher education system that would not only meet the current needs of our country, but meet the future needs of our nation too—a plan that would have targets and measurable outcomes so that we as a nation could track our progress. The panel engaged extensively across the higher education sector through the university accord consultation process, engaging with students, staff, researchers, industry and other governments to examine a range of issues.</para>
<para>My electorate of Chisholm is home to many students, academics, university staff and families with an incredibly deep interest in higher education. I'm really pleased to say that my community had the opportunity to participate in the accord review process. This included direct feedback that I received via electronic correspondence and mobile offices, including on campuses at Monash and Deakin University, in my electorate at that point, and I had the opportunity to hear directly from students. I'm incredibly grateful for the feedback that was provided. Students spoke with me and my staff about the need to improve student supports. They spoke about student safety on campus. They spoke about the lack of access to Commonwealth supported places and about the challenges of balancing studies whilst trying to earn an income and, at the same time, needing to undertake unpaid prac placements for their nursing or teaching degree. Sadly, I also heard from students about their very deep worries around student debt and the prospect of potentially never being able to afford a home of their own, something we're seeking to fix through our recently passed tax changes around negative gearing.</para>
<para>Feedback from our community was also received by way of a comprehensive higher education survey that I conducted across my electorate, which received hundreds of submissions. Eighty-four per cent of respondents to my survey had previously studied at an Australian university, and 61 per cent were employed in higher education. I also was employed in higher education for a period of time. Working in universities was my first career. So I'm very passionate about the issues people raised with me.</para>
<para>The views I received from my electorate really helped inform the position I was able to take to government, and on behalf of my electorate of Chisholm I made a submission to the consultation on the <inline font-style="italic">A</inline><inline font-style="italic">ccord interim report</inline>. I stated in my submission that the issues uncovered through the Chisholm higher education survey demonstrated that there was a very clear expectation from the community and sector stakeholders that higher education should be meaningfully reformed—that we should not squander the chance afforded to us in government to make the deep and significant changes required in order to improve the Australian higher education system, which is an already excellent system but with clear areas where things could be improved. I also submitted to the accord process that the platform provided in the consultation process was important in fostering consensus and driving transformative change, that consultation itself was very important and that through that consultation we could be more transparent and accountable around our expectations of higher education, ensuring that benefits would be shared.</para>
<para>Once again, I really want to express my gratitude to my community of Chisholm for their feedback and the opportunity to put their views to our minister and to our government around the improvements people saw as essential to our higher education system. I'm pleased the government listened, and the final report of the Australian Universities Accord process really did reflect many of the concerns raised by my constituents. This final report serves as a blueprint for higher education reform over the next decade and the decade after that.</para>
<para>We've already, as the Albanese Labor government, implemented more than 30 of the accord's 47 recommendations in full or in part. This of course includes making HECS better and fairer by cutting 20 per cent of HECS debts, and I know that means a lot for my community in Chisholm. We've changed the way student debt is calculated, which is a significant change. That happened when we capped indexation on HECS debts to the lower of the CPI and the WPI. That has meant that more than 23,000 people in my electorate will never again see their debts grow faster than their wages. That's really important.</para>
<para>We also introduced, for the first time, paid prac for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students, which is a really important initiative to which we've since announced an expansion. One of our initiatives, too, was the introduction of the National Student Ombudsman, as well as the National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence. These are two reforms that I was particularly passionate about. Through the accord process I heard directly from students and staff about their own lived experiences both on and off campus. It also gave me cause to reflect on my own lived experiences and those of my peers throughout my academic life, both as a student who lived on campus and as a staff member in a university. I recognised how important it was to introduce a new student ombudsman, and I'm pleased to say that we have delivered on this recommendation.</para>
<para>The Australian Universities Accord recommended adopting a new funding model for higher education that's planned and managed by the Australian Tertiary Education Commission through mission based compacts. It also recommended increasing the number of higher education places for students from underrepresented backgrounds, matched by a focus on the success of these students. These changes will inject an additional $3.6 billion into Australia's higher education system over the next decade to increase the number of students at university and to meet Australia's future skill needs.</para>
<para>I do at this point want to acknowledge that there is unfinished business here—the unfinished business of repealing the Job-Ready Graduates scheme. This is something I've been pretty outspoken on for a number of years, including before I entered parliament. I've had some very constructive conversations with the minister on this issue, and I hope to see more progress soon.</para>
<para>This bill before us today, though, enacts our commitment to expanding access to university through a new funding system. It will embed a new managed growth funding system and establish a demand-driven needs based funding model to support students from underrepresented backgrounds to access university and to succeed at university. The completion of courses is very important. It will also formalise the role of the commission in allocating Commonwealth supported places. This new managed growth funding system will effectively uncap the number of places for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and from regional areas. This new system will address existing issues in the higher education funding system and will better align Commonwealth funding with enrolments at universities. Our changes are expected to result in an extra 230,000 domestic students commencing at university over the next decade. That's 230,000 lives that are going to be changed and who are going to be able to access opportunities they may not have otherwise been able to.</para>
<para>Higher education providers will be supported to transition to the new funding system. Demand-driven, needs based funding will provide extra funding to support students who come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses. Similarly to Gonski funding for schools, the more students a university has that meet the appropriate criteria, the more funding the university will receive to help those students to participate and to succeed at university.</para>
<para>Under this new needs based funding system, the amount of funding per student will more than double next year in some cases. This bill sets the base equity amount at $1,535 and the base regional amount at $1,398. That is more than double the average amount that was provided to universities per student last year, which was as little as $600 under similar previous programs. Universities will be able to use this extra funding for things like tutoring, mentoring and other academic supports, for direct financial assistance through scholarships and grants, and for offsetting the higher cost of campuses in regional and remote areas. In addition, the bill sets out a framework for the commission to exercise its existing function to allocate international student places, where the minister for education makes an international allocation pool determination.</para>
<para>In summary, this bill embeds a new managed growth funding system to support growth of domestic students, particularly those from low socioeconomic backgrounds and regional and remote backgrounds. It establishes a demand-driven, needs based funding model to support students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses. It critically formalises the role of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission in allocating Commonwealth supported places to higher education providers.</para>
<para>Significantly, these changes have been supported by a range of stakeholders within the higher education sector. Australian Technology Network of Universities Executive Director Dr Andy Marks stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Making access to university fairer is just the beginning … these measures will also lift the nation's skill-base in targeted-technology based areas.</para></quote>
<para>Professor Theo Farrell, the Vice-Chancellor of La Trobe University, has said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For Australia to meet its future workforce and productivity needs, we must increase access to higher education and ensure there is enough growth in the system … this legislation is an important step towards that vision.</para></quote>
<para>On funding, we've also heard from students, including through the National Union of Students national president Felix Hughes, who has said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">These reforms recognise that equity must be built into the higher education funding system and that supporting students from underrepresented backgrounds is essential to creating a more accessible higher education system.</para></quote>
<para>There is, of course, more to be done when it comes to making our higher education system better, fairer and more accessible. This legislation is a very important step. It will help to open the doors of opportunity, as the name suggests. It's opening those doors wider. That's what the Labor government is committed to doing for every student in my electorate and everywhere throughout our nation. On that, I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. Australia's universities are among our most important national institutions. They educate the next generation of teachers, nurses, engineers, scientists and business leaders. They drive research and innovation, contribute billions of dollars to our economy and enrich the cultural and civic life of communities right across the country.</para>
<para>But it's also true that our higher education system faces significant challenges. Many young Australians are carrying HELP debts far larger than previous generations did while also trying to save for a deposit on a house in an increasingly expensive housing market and trying to establish themselves financially. For too many graduates, debt accumulated through study has become another pressure in an already difficult cost-of-living environment.</para>
<para>At the same time, university staff are under considerable strain. Academic and professional staff have faced years of uncertainty, workload pressures and funding instability. Many institutions continue to grapple with workforce challenges that affect both the quality of education and the wellbeing of those who deliver it. Across the sector, we have also seen controversies involving governance, campus culture and the management of public resources. These issues have rightly attracted scrutiny, because universities occupy a unique position in Australian society. They receive significant public support and play a crucial role in shaping our nation's future.</para>
<para>In this context, the Australian Universities Accord sought to examine Australia's higher education system and create a long-term plan for reform. The accord's final report established a road map for higher education to ensure Australia has the skills, workforce and research capacity necessary to meet the challenges of coming decades. A strong university sector produces the knowledge, skills and research that underpin economic growth. It creates opportunities for people to develop their talents and fulfil their potential. It strengthens our democracy by encouraging inquiry, debate and critical thinking. The benefits extend beyond students themselves. Communities that host universities gain jobs, investment, cultural vitality and greater economic activity.</para>
<para>The accord also sets ambitious targets for educational attainment. It recommended lifting the tertiary attainment rate of working-age Australians from around 60 per cent today to at least 80 per cent by 2050. It also proposed increasing the proportion of Australians aged 25 to 30 with a university qualification from approximately 45 per cent to 55 per cent over the same period. Achieving those objectives will require substantial growth in the higher education system. The number of Commonwealth supported university students will need to more than double, rising from around 860,000 today to about 1.8 million by 2050.</para>
<para>But the accord recognised that growth alone is not enough. It identified the persistent inequality that exists within our education system and the reality that students from disadvantaged backgrounds often require additional support to succeed. Students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds, regional and remote communities and First Nations communities continue to be underrepresented in higher education. Addressing those barriers was rightly identified as a central objective of reform.</para>
<para>The bill before the House forms part of the government's response to some of the recommendations contained within the accord. I welcome the objective of expanding opportunity, particularly for students from disadvantaged backgrounds and those living in regional and rural Australia. Ensuring that more Australians can access higher education is a goal we should all support. However, I hold concerns that some elements of this bill may be unnecessarily restrictive to student choice, reduce institutional flexibility and create a system that becomes overly dependent on future ministerial discretion.</para>
<para>This legislation will be highly consequential for both universities and students. In broad terms, it does three things. First, it reshapes the way Commonwealth supported places are funded through the introduction of a managed growth funding model. Second, it establishes a new needs based funding framework. Third, it creates a framework for the allocation of international student places. Under the current system, Commonwealth funding is largely distributed through maximum basic grant arrangements, with student demand playing a significant role in determining growth over time.</para>
<para>The bill proposes a different approach. Rather than growth occurring primarily in response to student demand, the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, would be responsible for allocating funded student places to institutions. The government's argument is that this allows growth to be directed towards areas of national priority while providing universities with greater certainty about future investment. There is merit in that objective. Transparency around the size and growth of the higher education system is important. Universities need a degree of certainty so they can make long-term decisions about staffing, infrastructure, course offerings and student support services. I support these intentions.</para>
<para>However, I'm concerned that the legislation contains no requirement for future governments to increase the number of Commonwealth supported places over time. While the current government has made clear that it intends for the overall system to grow, this bill does not bind future ministers to that course. A future government could theoretically retain the framework while choosing not to expand opportunity. For that reason, I support the amendments being moved by the member for Curtin, particularly those requiring the minister to publish a statement of reasons for these important decisions, including the total number of Commonwealth supported places.</para>
<para>I also have concerns regarding the hard cap framework established by this bill. Currently, universities operate with a degree of flexibility and are able to enrol students above their allocated Commonwealth supported places when demand significantly exceeds expectations. This flexibility has allowed universities to respond to changing circumstances and accommodate student demand when additional places are needed. Under the model proposed in this legislation, that flexibility will be reduced. Universities that enrol more than five per cent above their allocation or 750 additional places, whichever is lower, will face financial penalties through the loss of student contribution revenue for those enrolments. My concern is that this could ultimately constrain student choice. While there are mechanisms through which universities can seek additional places and pathways through which ATEC can make recommendations to the minister, I'm not yet convinced these safeguards are sufficient. As these reforms are implemented, the government must ensure that student access and choice remain at the centre of the system.</para>
<para>There is also a broader issue that this bill does not adequately address. One of the major drivers of distortions within higher education over recent years has been the Job-ready Graduates Package. The Job-ready Graduates reforms were built on the assumption that changing the price of degrees would significantly change student behaviour. Certain degrees became cheaper in the hope that students would move into areas of workforce shortage, while others became substantially more expensive. That assumption has not been borne out. Students did not suddenly abandon their interests, talents and career aspirations because university fees changed, nor did large numbers switch disciplines simply because one degree costs less than another. Instead, student preferences remain relatively stable while debts increase dramatically for many students.</para>
<para>Today, some graduates leave university carrying debts many times larger than those of their peers studying different disciplines. For many students, a three-year degree can result in debt exceeding $50,000 before they have even secured full-time employment. As Universities Australia Chief Executive Officer Luke Sheehy has observed, Job-ready Graduates reduced public investment in university teaching by around $1 billion a year while increasing the share paid by students. The government is now spending $16 billion reducing HELP balances while leaving in place a system that continues to inflate them. That is not fiscal discipline. It's deferred reform. I share the view that the job-ready graduates scheme has failed to achieve its central objective and it remains one of the most significant unresolved issues in higher education policy.</para>
<para>Another major component of this bill relates to international students. The legislation establishes a framework through which a future government may determine an overall national cap on international student commencements, with ATEC responsible for distributing places across institutions. I support the principle of managed growth. International education is enormously valuable to Australia, but it is entirely reasonable that governments ensure expansion occurs in an orderly and sustainable manner. I also support the role of an independent commission in helping allocate those places. However, I do have concerns about the breadth of ministerial powers to determine the overall number of international student places. Whenever such significant powers are concentrated in the hands of a minister, there is a risk that decisions become political rather than evidence-based. The challenge is to strike the right balance between accountability, independence and transparency. I believe further safeguards can strengthen the framework and reduce that risk.</para>
<para>The final major reform contained within this bill is the introduction of a needs based funding model. Under this approach, universities will receive additional funding linked to enrolling and supporting students from groups that have historically faced barriers to higher education, including First Nations students, students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds and students from regional and remote communities. The legislation also requires those funds to be directed towards student support and regional delivery purposes. This is a reform I strongly support.</para>
<para>Access to higher education is not equal across Australia. A student's opportunities are often shaped by where they grow up, the resources available in their school, their family's financial circumstances and whether they can relocate to pursue study. Recognising those realities is about ensuring that talent is not overlooked simply because opportunity is unevenly distributed. If we are serious about expanding participation and meeting the ambitious targets set out in the accord, then additional support for underrepresented students is essential.</para>
<para>In conclusion, I support the aims and many of the reforms contained within this bill. Planned and purposeful growth is preferable to the unmanaged drift identified in the accord process, needs based funding is a long overdue recognition that equity requires more than simply opening the front door and a stronger role for independent oversight in the allocation of international student places represents a positive step forward. However, I remain concerned about the hard enrolment caps proposed by the legislation and the scope of ministerial powers regarding international student numbers. I will therefore support the crossbench amendments designed to address these concerns.</para>
<para>I also strongly urge the government to remove the failed job-ready graduates scheme which continues to burden students with higher debts without delivering the workforce outcomes it promised. Despite these reservations, I acknowledge the genuine ambition behind this legislation. Expanding opportunity, broadening participation and preparing Australia for the skills challenges of the future are important objectives, and they deserve our support. I thank the minister for his leadership on this vitally important work, and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>News Journalism Payments Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7528" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">News Journalism Payments Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>31</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I put the question that the bill be read a second time.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
<para>Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>31</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Right around the world, the organisations that invest in the news are losing revenue to the tech platforms that use their work. Television, radio and newspaper newsrooms, including the National Press Gallery here in Parliament House, have felt the effects through budget cuts, staff reductions and increased workloads. I want to say to Australia's journalists, news producers, editors, photographers and videographers: we have your back. The sustainability of our news sector must be addressed, and it must be addressed urgently, because a healthy news sector is essential for a flourishing democracy. Without broadly accepted objective facts, reasoned debate becomes impossible. We talk not to each other but past each other. It makes it harder for us to maintain our great Australian sense of optimism. We literally stop being on the same page.</para>
<para>This legislation will help keep 28 million Australians on that same page. In a world where lies are routinely spread by bad actors, sometimes by images that are literally not real, truthful and accurate news is more important than ever. In its absence, debate is too often replaced by anger, discourse by shouting, democratic discussion by abuse and cooperation by division. As we all know, this trend, tragically, is global. But we can counter it. With this legislation, Australia is now once again taking leadership on making digital technology work for people—making sure that platforms make an appropriate contribution to the news that they rely on and from which they make enormous profits. We are showing the way to support the fourth estate, and, once again, we offer our policy as a model to the democratic world.</para>
<para>The News Bargaining Incentive is world-leading legislation that will help keep our media sector vibrant and sustainable into the future. It is bipartisan, and it is strong. The original news media bargaining code was designed to give Australian media companies a fair shot at doing deals with some of the largest companies on Earth, who use their content, often free of charge. This legislation, however, is needed because there is a loophole that has been used. This will keep our news gathering strong and fulfil the promise of the bargaining code. It will mean that large digital platforms cannot avoid their obligations. If those platforms fail to do deals with Australian news creators, which are what we want to see, they will incur a charge that will make its way to the Australian media sector through a payment scheme. Importantly, there is no revenue to be gained for the government. This is directly about supporting journalists. Every single dollar collected will be returned to the sector, and any funds will go directly to employing journalists.</para>
<para>Following extensive consultation and engagement with the opposition, other members of parliament, the media and tech stakeholders, the original legislation has been strengthened in several important ways—most notably, narrowing the charge base while increasing the rate of the incentive; increasing the number of deals that platforms need to make from six up to eight; adding professional networking sites; and broadening the definition of journalists to include additional essential news roles, including the many freelancers who produce so much new content.</para>
<para>I want to praise the minister for communications for the extraordinary work that she's done to consult and bring this legislation before the parliament. This means that more media companies in Australia will be supported, particularly smaller ones who will negotiate with the big tech companies en bloc, including our ethnic media organisations as well as some of the regional media organisations. It is important that we back Australia's vibrant small publishers and online news sites. Notably, five per cent of any incentive funds will be directed to AAP as a recognition of the important role that it plays in supporting public interest journalism and news organisations across Australia.</para>
<para>This legislation once again places Australia as the world leader when it comes to making technological change work for people. As with our social media minimum age, our gig worker reforms and our forthcoming standards for AI, we are showing that Australians will always stand up for the national interest. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (13) to the News Journalism Payments Bill 2026, as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 3, page 3 (lines 23 to 26), omit the paragraph beginning "Also, 5% of the revenue", substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 40, page 39 (line 12), omit "10%", substitute "20%".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 44, page 43 (line 7), omit "10%", substitute "20%".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 93, page 87 (line 5), omit "10%", substitute "20%".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 93, page 87 (lines 8 to 12), omit the paragraph beginning "5% of collected charge revenue", substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 94, page 88 (after line 11), after subclause (1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) In deciding which eligible entities (if any) to make a grant of financial assistance to under subsection (1), the Secretary must give priority to eligible entities that are not approved participants for the payment period during the which the grant under subsection (1) would be paid.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 94, page 88 (lines 15 to 17), omit the definition of <inline font-style="italic">eligible entity</inline>, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">annual income</inline>, for an individual, a partnership, a trust or a body corporate, means the amount for the individual, partnership, trust or body corporate that is worked out in accordance with regulations made for the purposes of this definition.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">eligible entity</inline> means an individual, a partnership, a trust or a body corporate (other than corporation to which paragraph 51(xx) of the Constitution applies) that has an annual income of less than $20 million.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Clause 95, page 88 (after line 25), after subclause (1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) In deciding which eligible grant recipient corporations (if any) to make a grant of financial assistance to under subsection (1), the Secretary must give priority to eligible grant recipient corporations that are not eligible corporations.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: For <inline font-style="italic">eligible corporation</inline>, see section 7.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Clause 95, page 89 (before line 1), before the definition of <inline font-style="italic">eligible grant recipient corporation</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">annual income</inline>, for a corporation, means the amount for the corporation that is worked out in accordance with regulations made for the purposes of this definition.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Clause 95, page 89 (line 4), omit paragraph (c) of the definition of <inline font-style="italic">eligible grant recipient corporation entity</inline>, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) that has an annual income less than $20 million.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Clause 100, page 90 (line 25), omit "half", substitute "three-quarters".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Clause 100, page 90 (line 27), omit "half", substitute "three-quarters".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Clause 100, page 91 (line 3), omit "half", substitute "one-quarter".</para></quote>
<para>I support the intent of these bills. Platforms that profit from Australian journalism should pay for it, and the previous code failed the moment the platforms realised they could simply walk away from the news. But, as drafted, this scheme will work for Australia's largest and publishers and leave small, independent and community media behind. My amendment addresses this.</para>
<para>The first group of amendments to this bill ensure that small publishers get a share of the deals. Under the scheme as drafted, a platform must strike a minimum of eight deals to discharge its obligations. Nothing in this bill requires any of those deals to be with a small publisher. Australia's largest media companies own dozens of outlets between them. One Western Australian player alone publishes 22 papers, so eight deals can be reached without a single independent publisher being party to any of them. We should not assume the market will correct for this. When one independent newspaper in my electorate had lawyers write to Meta and Google, the correspondence was ignored.</para>
<para>Amendments (1) to (13) to the payments bill provide that a service group cannot claim the offset unless at least 12.5 per cent of its qualifying expenditure for the year goes to news businesses with an annual income under $20 million. This is not a heavy impost on companies of this scale. Small and medium publishers account for around 16 per cent of market share, so 12.5 per cent is a reasonable requirement. It will, however, guarantee that the smallest publishers are part of the deal making rather than spectators to it. I commend this amendment to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government does not support the proposed amendments to the News Journalism Payments Bill 2026, moved by the member for Curtin. Many MPs have highlighted the important role that public interest journalism plays in a healthy democracy. It combats myths and disinformation, keeps local communities connected and supports social cohesion.</para>
<para>We strongly believe the bill strikes the right balance to support the sustainability of new publishers, including small and regional publishers; the continued provision of trusted public interest journalism; and the employment of journalists in Australia. Specifically for smaller and independent publishers, the bill includes that five per cent of any revenue raised by the NBI will be allocated for a separate grant program, with the focus on supporting small publishers and startups to build their businesses and produce news for their local communities. An additional uplift of 20 per cent will be applied to journalists that work in regional and remote areas for small to medium news organisations and those working in news organisations that cater to diverse communities. News businesses with low revenue will also be able to access funding to convert volunteer journalists into paid employees and to support editorial work conducted by employees with hybrid roles. For this reason, the government does not support the proposed amendments to the News Journalism Payments Bill move by the member for Curtin.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [11:34]<br />(The Deputy Speaker—Mr Buchholz) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>11</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Le, D. T. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>69</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived. <br />Bill agreed to. </p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>34</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>News Journalism Payments (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7530" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">News Journalism Payments (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>34</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>34</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>News Media Bargaining (Administration) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7525" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">News Media Bargaining (Administration) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>34</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>34</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (7), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 6, page 4 (after line 18), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">amount</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">annual income</inline>, of an entity for a financial year (the <inline font-style="italic">principal year</inline>), means:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) unless paragraph (b) applies—the entity's annual revenue as set out in its annual accounts, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, for the most recent financial year (being the principal year or an earlier financial year) for which such accounts exist; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) if the entity has an alternative 12-month financial reporting period—the entity's annual revenue as set out in its annual accounts, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, for the most recent alternative 12-month financial reporting period (being a period that ends at or before the start of the principal year) for which such accounts exist.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 6, page 7 (after line 6), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">significant social media or search service</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">small news business corporate group</inline>, in relation to a financial year, has the meaning given by section 11A.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Page 12 (after line 31), after clause 11, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 11A Meaning of <inline font-style="italic">small news business corporate group</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A news business corporate group is <inline font-style="italic">small news business corporate group</inline>for a financial year if the sum of the annual income of each member of the group for the financial year is less than $20 million.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: For how to determine the annual income of a member of the group for a financial year if the member has an alternative 12-month financial reporting period, see paragraph (b) of the definition of <inline font-style="italic">annual income</inline>in section 6.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 15, page 18 (lines 7 to 9), omit the paragraph beginning "To be entitled to an offset", substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">To be entitled to an offset, the service group must have new eligible expenditure for the financial year in relation to at least 8 different news business corporate groups, and at least 12.5% of that expenditure must be in relation to news business corporate groups with an annual income of less than $20 million.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 17, page 19 (line 12), omit "financial year.", substitute "financial year; and".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 17, page 19 (after line 12), at the end of subclause 17(1), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the total new eligible expenditure of all members of the service group for the financial year, in relation to groups that are small news business corporate groups for the financial year, is at least 12.5% of the total new eligible expenditure of all members of the service group for the financial year in relation to all news business corporate groups.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 30, page 32 (after line 6), after subclause 30(1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) Without limiting subsection (1), the review must consider the operation and effect of the condition in paragraph 17(1)(c), including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) whether the 12.5% figure mentioned in that paragraph remains appropriate; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) whether the $20 million combined annual income threshold in relation to small news business corporate groups (see section 11A) remains appropriate.</para></quote>
<para>The first set of these amendments would create a meaningful grant pool. They would lift the general grant stream from five per cent of levy revenue to 15 per cent, with the Australian Associated Press stream unchanged at five per cent. This would mean a total carve out of 20 per cent.</para>
<para>Five per cent is a non-substantive gesture. It's unlikely to sustain independent community-focused journalism, let alone grow it. Fifteen per cent can sustain journalism in communities that will never be commercially attractive to a global platform—regional towns, multicultural audiences, First Nations communities—and that a commercial deal will never reach.</para>
<para>The second group of amendments I have moved opens grant eligibility to the publishers who need it. At present, grants under this scheme are available only to organisations that cannot participate in the payments scheme at all. In practice, this is those organisations which are too small to register under the code and fall below the $150,000 revenue test. The consequence is a gap that strands every independent, suburban and regional outlet in this country. They are too big for the safety net and too small for a seat at the table. In Perth that includes the <inline font-style="italic">POST</inline>, the <inline font-style="italic">Fremantle Herald</inline>, the <inline font-style="italic">Examiner</inline> and the Midland <inline font-style="italic">Echo</inline>—independently owned newspapers in a city where almost every other community masthead now sits under a single proprietor. These amendments open grants to organisations with annual income under $20 million, whether or not they participate in the payment scheme, with priority given to those that do not. This would ensure grant funds reach the publishers currently shut out above the $150,000 threshold without displacing the smallest organisations already eligible.</para>
<para>These changes are modest. None of them cost the Commonwealth a dollar more than these bills already contemplate. They simply change who the money reaches. Communities deserve to be seen and heard, and that will not happen if this scheme only works for the largest voices. I ask the government to support these amendments today before this scheme is locked in for a decade.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the amendments moved by the member for Curtin. Public interest journalism has arguably never mattered more. Small and independent publishers continue to create content for specialised communities like the <inline font-style="italic">Star Observer</inline>, <inline font-style="italic">N</inline><inline font-style="italic">eo</inline><inline font-style="italic">s Kosmos</inline> and the <inline font-style="italic">Jewish Independent</inline>, all of which are in my community of Wentworth. Others serve specific local communities like the <inline font-style="italic">B</inline><inline font-style="italic">east</inline>, the <inline font-style="italic">L</inline><inline font-style="italic">ocal</inline><inline font-style="italic"> Paddo</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">E</inline><inline font-style="italic">astern </inline><inline font-style="italic">S</inline><inline font-style="italic">uburbs Life</inline>. For under-25s, 71 per cent now access news through social media, and 60 per cent of Australians aged 18 to 24 have never used newspapers as a source of news, but young people haven't lost interest. Since 2024, interest in news among 18-to-24-year-olds has risen 12 percentage points to 47 per cent. Government has a responsibility to ensure news businesses receive a fair return of the value they contribute and that the news Australians find on these platforms is worth finding.</para>
<para>The previous bargaining code exposed a fatal flaw that platforms could simply remove news from their services and walk away without any obligation to pay for it. These bills fix that, and I commend the government for bringing these bills forward, but they also may inherit the code's other failure—deals overwhelmingly flowing to the largest players, while smaller and independent outlets are left behind. It is to these outlets that I want to speak to. The member for Curtin has raised a number of amendments that will support access to funding to smaller journalist organisations providing quality journalism, and I think this is absolutely critical, because we know that, even in the previous deal that was struck in this area, there were some small players that were included. This does not guarantee that they will be included in future deals.</para>
<para>Specifically, for instance, having spoken to a number of the smaller players, I know they talked about the challenges they had in dealing with the large players like Google and the concern that, had they not had philanthropic support to organise around doing deals with these large players, they would not have been included in the future. This is really what these amendments go to. We have to create an environment that allows small news sources and emerging news organisations to be supported. I do not believe, as the bill is currently structured, that this allows this. The member for Curtin has put some useful and constructive amendments forwards in terms of allowing this.</para>
<para>I recognise that the government has listened to stakeholders, including by lifting the offset rate to 200 per cent for deals with smaller publishers and by including freelancers and journalists headcounts. These were changes called for by the Local & Independent News Association, and they matter. As we consider these amendments, we must listen closely to those voices who are not clearly represented in the media most of us read every day, which are the small and special-interest publishers who serve communities that many of the major players will never reach. There is no guaranteed certainty that these minor players will get the support that they need to continue to innovate and serve communities, and this is why I support these amendments.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the amendments moved by the member for Curtin and to commend them to the minister and to the House. The principle behind this legislation is straightforward. Major digital platforms should not be able to derive value from Australian journalism without making a fair contribution to the people and organisations that produce it. I've argued for years that our news media are engaged in a David and Goliath battle with global social media and search platforms. These platforms have enormous market power and they increasingly control how news is distributed, how it is discovered and whether it is seen at all. This bill and these amendments are important attempts to correct that imbalance, but we must ensure that the legislation's benefits do not flow overwhelmingly to the largest media companies while smaller, local and independent publishers remain on the sidelines, so these amendments are really important.</para>
<para>The bill currently reserves only five per cent of any revenue collected through the charge for grants to smaller news organisations. These amendments would increase that share to 15 per cent. They would also expand eligibility for those grants to news organisations with annual income below $20 million, rather than limiting the program to the extremely narrow group of publishers with revenue below $150,000. Importantly, priority would be given to news organisations that are not otherwise eligible to receive payments under the main scheme.</para>
<para>In practical terms, these amendments create a fairer opportunity for small, local, independent and emerging publishers. This is particularly important all over Australia, but especially in Warringah. We're fortunate to have dedicated local publishers, including the <inline font-style="italic">Manly Observer</inline>, the <inline font-style="italic">Northern Beaches Advocate</inline> and the <inline font-style="italic">Tawny Frogmouth</inline>. These outlets report on the issues that directly affect our community, council decisions, local development, transport failures, environmental threats, small businesses, schools, community organisations and public health. During emergencies, they provide trusted and immediate local information. They attend the meetings that national outlets do not. They follow stories after the television cameras have gone, and they know the community because they are part of it. In 2024, I congratulated the <inline font-style="italic">Manly Observer</inline> on launching its own news app. It became a hugely popular news app in Australia's Apple App Store. That remarkable response demonstrated the demand for trusted local reporting, but it also demonstrated the length to which a small publisher must go to avoid being entirely dependent on the algorithms and commercial decisions of a global platform.</para>
<para>Local journalism should not have to survive solely through ingenuity, unpaid work and goodwill. Strong local journalism is also one of our most fundamental defences against misinformation. When trusted news disappears from people's feeds, it is not necessarily replaced by careful or verified reporting. It's replaced by rumour, outrage, conspiracy and divisive content designed to keep people scrolling. A healthy democracy needs national investigative journalism, but it also needs to have someone reporting from the council chamber at a local government level, a community level. It needs to have someone covering local court proceedings, asking questions about delayed road projects, investigating illegal vape sales near schools or connecting a family in crisis with local support. These amendments simply ensure that a meaningful share of the revenue is available to smaller organisations to broaden the range of eligible publishers and prioritise those that cannot access the principal payment scheme.</para>
<para>If the purpose of this bill is to sustain Australian journalism, then it must sustain journalism at every level, not merely organisations that already possess the greatest negotiating power. I urge the government and the House to support these amendments.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government does not support the proposed amendments moved by the member for Curtin to the News Media Bargaining (Administration) Bill 2026. Many MPs on both sides of the House have highlighted the important role that public interest journalism plays in a healthy democracy and, in particular, the valuable work of small and special interest publishers. That's why we strongly believe the bill strikes the right balance to support the sustainability of new publishers, including small and regional publishers, with the continued provision of trusted public interest journalism and the employment of journalists in Australia.</para>
<para>Specifically for smaller publishers, the bill includes the requirement for platforms to enter at least eight commercial agreements to offset their liability under the charge and a 200 per cent weighting on commercial deals for small or medium-sized businesses. For this reason, the government does not support the proposed amendments moved by the member for Curtin.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 17, page 19 (line 12), omit "financial year.", substitute "financial year; and".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 17, page 19 (after line 12), at the end of subclause (1), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the combined eligible expenditure of all of the members of the service group in relation to any 2 news business corporate groups is no greater than half of the combined eligible expenditure of all of the members of the service group in relation to all news business corporate groups.</para></quote>
<para>Almost 30 years ago, I had the privilege of beginning my cadetship at the <inline font-style="italic">Liverpool City </inline><inline font-style="italic">Champion</inline> and later helped establish the <inline font-style="italic">Fairfield </inline><inline font-style="italic">City </inline><inline font-style="italic">Champion</inline>, so the connection to journalism for me is quite a personal one. That work taught me the value of local and grassroot journalism. The stories that matter most to people are often not the ones that reach national television or dominate the headlines; they are stories about a dangerous intersection, a struggling family business, a community group, a sporting group awards night or a local Rotary Club activity. Those are the ordinary, extraordinary stories of communities like mine—stories that connect our local residents to what's happening in their area or to individuals and organisations serving the local area. And they deserve to be told by the people who are part of the community and grew up in the community.</para>
<para>Neither the<inline font-style="italic"> Liverpool </inline><inline font-style="italic">City Champion</inline> nor the <inline font-style="italic">Fairfield City </inline><inline font-style="italic">Champion</inline> exist anymore. Like too many local papers, they were priced out and swallowed up by social media giants and, of course, the bigger players. That loss is much more than the closure of a newspaper; it means fewer opportunities for our young, aspiring storytellers, especially those from multicultural and linguistically diverse backgrounds, to enter journalism, learn the skills of being a balanced reporter, research and analyse stories, ask questions, communicate, build confidence, hone their talent and tell the stories of their own communities through genuine, grassroots, shoe-leather reporting. It was also a chance to learn about death knocks—and that was, for me, getting into the ring.</para>
<para>For my community, this matters enormously. Rich in languages, cultures, experiences and perspective, those stories are Australian stories. They are the Australian story. But they do not make it onto our social media feeds, let alone to the top of a search engine. The loudest voices are heard. The largest organisations, those with the deepest pockets, are seen. Meanwhile, small local, regional, multicultural and independent outlets are shouting into the void and left to fend for themselves.</para>
<para>I can see the intention of this proposed legislation to change that, and I'm realistic about what these bills before us can and cannot do. They cannot revive every outlet, newsroom or cadetship that has already been lost, but I have hope that they can support resilient local journalists and independent news organisations that are still hanging on. They can give the next generation of aspiring voices, whether in a rural community or in a diverse community like Fowler, an opportunity to tell their community's stories. But, if this scheme is to strengthen media diversity, we must ensure smaller players are not again swallowed up or edged out by the largest ones.</para>
<para>I have moved a very simple amendment. As the bill stands, a platform can qualify for the offset by spending money on at least eight news groups. My amendments add one more test: no two of those news groups can take more than half of that spending between them. Put simply, at least half the money must go beyond the two biggest names on the list. It is a small change, but it matters. It means platforms have to make real agreements with a wider range of newsrooms, local, regional, multicultural, community and independent, not just the two that already have the loudest voices and the deepest pockets. Without it, a platform could tick the box of dealing with eight news groups while sending almost all of its money to just two of them. That would meet the letter of the law; it would not meet its purpose.</para>
<para>This amendment is not about punishing the big players. It's about making sure this scheme does not repeat what has already happened in this country, where the big get bigger and the smallest get swallowed up. Lifting up the weakest members of our society is the core of a true democracy. So too is ensuring that communities can tell their own stories, in their own voices. I support this bill and urge the House to support this sensible amendment.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to support these very worthy amendments from the member for Fowler, who, as this House has heard, has a background in journalism and understands the importance of those local voices. I am from central western New South Wales, and against the odds we still have small, independent media outlets telling our local stories. We need to make sure that this legislation filters down to those smaller, independent organisations, which quite frankly are doing it tough. It's amazing that they still exist, but against the odds, through passion for journalism and telling our local stories, we have hardworking journalists out there telling the stories of regional Australia in our local communities. They need our support. What we want to make sure is that it's not just the large media organisations that benefit from this legislation because we need as many diverse local voices in country Australia as we can get.</para>
<para>I think that these amendments from the member for Fowler go to that and support that—supporting local independent journalism that actually is local and tells local stories rather than having a larger media group dominating. We need those smaller voices to be heard that support and advocate for the things that we hold dear and the things that we are fighting for. The reality is that the country is different from the city in so many ways. We've got some really big issues facing regional Australia at the moment. We need as many advocates and country voices out there fighting for us, and that's what these smaller independent media outlets do. So I commend the member for Fowler for bringing these really important amendments, and I would urge every right-thinking member in this House to get behind these amendments and not only support country journalism but support the smaller, independent media outlets that our country communities still rely so much on.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government doesn't support the amendments proposed by the member for Fowler for similar reasons, which I won't relitigate, as for the amendments by the member for Curtin. I'll note that the member for Fowler said this is a small change, and I think that's the point. It would have a sizeable impact on the balance of the deal that has been struck here between continued provision of trusted public-interest journalism with employment of journalists in Australia and the small and regional publishers. In expanding the bill to eight commercial agreements to entice deals, we are doing what every single publisher who has come through my door and through the Assistant Treasurer's door—including LINA and the small and special interest group publishers—has asked, which is that the first priority of this be for deals to be struck. That is what we are trying to achieve, and this work is supposed to be the back-up if that doesn't work. So we believe that we have struck the right balance here and we will not be supporting the amendments.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Fowler be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [12:07]<br />(The Deputy Speaker—Hon. Scott Buchholz) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>12</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Le, D. T. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>65</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (6), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">1) Clause 6, page 5 (after line 1), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">charge offset</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">coalition agreement</inline> has the meaning given by section 18A.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">coalition member</inline>, for a coalition agreement, has the meaning given by section 18A.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 6, page 6 (after line 3), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">new eligible expenditure</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">news bargaining coalition</inline> means two or more news businesses, at least one of which is conducted by a small or medium business entity, that act together (whether through a jointly owned entity, an unincorporated association, a common representative, or any other collective arrangement) for the purpose of negotiating or entering into agreements of the kind described in paragraph 18(1)(c) or 18(2)(d) with one or more social media services or search services.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 17, page 19 (line 16), after "subsection 18(1) or (2) (about commercial deals)", insert "or section 18A (about coalition deals)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Page 22 (after line 4), after clause 18, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">18A Expenditure under coalition agreements with news bargaining coalitions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Coalition agreements</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) An agreement is a <inline font-style="italic">coalition agreement</inline> if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) it is an agreement of a kind described in paragraph 18(1)(c) or 18(2)(d); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the other entity or entities under the agreement (disregarding subparagraphs 18(1)(c)(ii) to (iv) and 18(2)(d)(ii) to (iv)) are, or act on behalf of, members of a news bargaining coalition; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) each news business on whose behalf the agreement is entered into is, just before the agreement is entered into, a member of a registered news business corporate group or a news business corporate group.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) Each news business referred to in paragraph (1)(c) is a <inline font-style="italic">coalition member</inline> for the coalition agreement.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Expenditure taken to be incurred in relation to each coalition member</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) If:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a member of the parent entity's service group provides consideration under a coalition agreement; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the amount of that consideration would, apart from paragraph 18(1)(c) or 18(2)(d) (as applicable), otherwise satisfy the requirements of subsection 18(1) or (2) in relation to a coalition member;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">then, despite the entity providing the consideration not dealing directly and exclusively with a single news business corporate group, subsection 18(1) or (2) (as applicable) applies as if the agreement had been made separately with each coalition member, to the extent of that coalition member's attributed share of the consideration.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Working out the attributed share</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) A coalition member's attributed share of consideration provided under a coalition agreement is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the amount specified for that coalition member in the coalition agreement; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) if no amount is specified for that coalition member as mentioned in paragraph (a)—the amount determined by the news bargaining coalition (however that determination is made by the coalition), and notified in writing to the Commissioner before, or within a reasonable period after, the consideration is provided.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: Paragraphs (a) and (b) leave the method of allocation entirely to the coalition agreement or to the coalition itself; this section does not prescribe, and the rules may not prescribe, a method or formula for determining a coalition member's attributed share.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The sum of the attributed shares determined for a coalition agreement under subsection (3) must not exceed the total consideration provided under the agreement.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Anti-double-counting</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) To avoid doubt, an amount counted as a coalition member's attributed share under this section is not also to be counted as eligible expenditure of the parent entity in relation to any other news business corporate group.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 20, page 22 (line 26), after "in relation to each news business corporate group", insert "(counting, for a coalition member's attributed share under section 18A, that share as new eligible expenditure in relation to the coalition member's own news business corporate group and no other)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 20, page 22 (after line 31), after subparagraph 20(1)(b)(ii), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ia) for a news business corporate group whose only new eligible expenditure for the financial year is an attributed share under section 18A, and which consists only of small or medium business entities for the financial year—200%; and</para></quote>
<para>I rise on these amendments because, as the bill is drafted, there is no explicit provision which allows for a coalition or collectively negotiated agreement to count as eligible expenditure. Section 18 requires payment to be made directly under an agreement with the members of a single news corporate group. This allows for individual papers which may be listed under one major group to enter into deals. It does not help those publishers which are independent. If a digital platform strikes one deal with a coalition of, say, three or 18 small regional publishers acting together, there may be ambiguity in this legislation about whether or not such an agreement would count as expenditure. There should be no uncertainty. We should be encouraging tech giants to negotiate with smaller publishers whenever we can.</para>
<para>Even if it does get counted, there's no mechanism to attribute it back to the individual mastheads for the purpose of the eight-group threshold or the small business offset rate. These amendments fix this gap directly. They insert a new section 18A, which treats a coalition deal as if it were a separate agreement with each participating publisher's own corporate group to the extent of the publisher's attributed share of the payment. How that share is worked out is left entirely to the coalition and the platform to negotiate between themselves, as the agreement will be individual. It simply requires that whatever shares are agreed add up to no more than what was actually paid. Each publisher's share then counts separately towards eight different group thresholds and towards the enhanced offset rate where the publisher is a small or medium business, with the safeguard to ensure that the same dollar can never be counted twice.</para>
<para>This is not a hypothetical problem. We have real lived experience of exactly this model working in this country. Country Press Australia negotiated on behalf of 240 regional and community publications. The Minderoo Foundation brought together 18 small independent publishers under the Public Interest Publishers Alliance. These arrangements exist because the ACCC recognised back in 2021 that individual small publishers have no real bargaining power against Google and Meta but a coalition does. Country Press Australia itself has welcomed the increase in number of required commercial agreements under this scheme on the assumption that regional independent publishers will be part of that count, but, under the bill as it stands, the assumption may not hold.</para>
<para>I want to let the minister know I'm not calling a division on these amendments. I recognise that the amendments were circulated late, though to be honest, we're frustrated. I'm frustrated that we're again debating this bill without the Senate inquiry. But I think that this is an area that would benefit from clarification because I think it is not clear in the legislation as written. It could be through an amendment or it could be through another mechanism to make sure that it's clear that an expenditure which is under a collectively bargained agreement negotiated through a coalition or bargaining representative can count as eligible expenditure. I think this is a genuine challenge and a genuine question that's been raised with me with independent publishers.</para>
<para>I raise the point that I raised in my earlier speech, which is that the minister and others—the Assistant Treasurer in particular—indicated that Google in the past had ended up with an agreement with a range of small publishers. That indicates that it's possible to strike bargains with small publishers. The great challenge of that, however, is that, having spoken to some of those small publishers who are part of that agreement, it was incredibly hard to get to the table to do that. They wouldn't have been able to do that as individuals. They did it because they were actually funded philanthropically to build a collective. And then, you know, there's enormous pressure. And sometimes in those cases, those deals fall apart. It was actually more the social pressure that enabled those deals to continue, because it would certainly have been easier for the major players not to be negotiating with these small players.</para>
<para>This is a difficult area. I think we all collectively want to support small, regional players. I do want to make sure that this legislation supports some sort of collective agreement for the smaller players to come together, because this is a concern that's been raised with me by the sector. I think it's a genuine question that those group of publishers have.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Wentworth for her amendment. We won't support it today, although I appreciate the intent of the amendment. I can say that I and my office have also had those meetings with those stakeholders. I think at the moment there's a disconnect between the intent of the bill and perhaps a requirement or a request of an explicit nature for the bill to attend to. We will continue to work that through. You have my word on that. I think we share the same values on this, and we're trying to get to the same outcome.</para>
<para>Ironically, I have Google waiting for me in my office, because this has all run a bit longer than we expected. May I say, I will immediately relay this to Google on behalf of our shared stakeholders in this space.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
<para>Bill agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>41</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>News Media Bargaining Charge Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7524" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">News Media Bargaining Charge Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>41</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>41</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill. I move the government amendment as circulated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 3, page 2 (line 11), omit "2.5%", substitute "2.75%".</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill, as amended, agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>41</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media Bargaining) (Consequential) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7526" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media Bargaining) (Consequential) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>41</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that this bill be read a second time.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>41</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7501" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>42</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One of our core beliefs as Australians is in a fair go for all. At the heart of a fair go for all is equality of opportunity, and at the heart of equality of opportunity is education. My mum was the first in her family to go to university. She grew up in different parts of Melbourne and regional Australia, even living on Gabo Island for a while when her dad was a lighthouse keeper. It's in the far north of Victoria. She told stories about sharks circling the jetty and penguins under her bed. If that's not regional and remote Australia, I don't know where is. She also worked as a hospital worker while she was studying a law degree. She was pregnant with my sister, and then, when she did her master's degree, she brought me to lectures as a baby. Eventually, she became a lawyer. That was possible because of a system that opened doors for her.</para>
<para>The community of Menzies, who I'm proud to represent, understand this instinctively. Places like Doncaster, Box Hill, Warrandyte, Templestowe, Park Orchards and Balwyn North are communities built by people who believe that, if you work hard and play by the rules, the system gives you a fair shot. They are people like my dad, who migrated to Australia from Singapore with nothing, and my mum, who studied while she worked as a hospital worker. They are people who sacrificed to give their children opportunities that they never had themselves. That is the lived experience of thousands of families across my community, and it is a story that the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 is writing for the next generation.</para>
<para>That story did not write itself. It was built by Labor governments over decades. It was Gough Whitlam who made university free, abolishing tuition fees and opening the doors of higher education to a generation of Australians who never imagined it possible—the children of factory workers, nurses, tradespeople and families who had never had anyone go to university before. It was Bob Hawke and Paul Keating who built HECS, a system that allowed students to access university without paying upfront, repaying their debt only once they were earning enough to do so. It was the Gillard government who commissioned the Gonski review and began the work of needs based school funding, the principle being that resources flowing to a school should reflect the needs of the students in it, not the postcode they happen to live in. Now, it is the Albanese Labor government continuing that work, fully and fairly funding every public school and delivering the biggest new investment in public education in Australia's history. With this bill, the government is extending the same principle—that access to higher education should be determined by capability and effort, not by background or postcode or the size of a family's bank account—into the tertiary education system. Every major advance in Australian education has been driven by Labor, and the bill continues this.</para>
<para>Not long ago, I had the privilege of visiting La Trobe University's SOLAR Lab, along with the Minister for Education, Jason Clare; Assistant Minister Ged Kearney; the then deputy premier and now premier, Ben Carroll; and the member for Bundoora, Colin Brooks. SOLAR stands for Science of Language and Reading. This lab gives researchers and teaching students the chance to observe and apply the very latest in educational innovation—the cutting-edge techniques about how children actually learn. We had the opportunity to watch one of the outstanding teachers from Templestowe Heights applying these techniques in practice.</para>
<para>But the real stars that day were not the researchers or the academics; they were the students from Templestowe Heights Primary School, from my community of Menzies, who were sitting there reading passages aloud from <inline font-style="italic">Hatchet</inline>, a book old enough that I also studied it at school. The principal, Rhys Coulson, and the teachers at Templestowe Heights are part of a national movement of educators who understand that how we teach matters just as much as what we teach. That visit demonstrated the opportunities that university can provide to individuals and to the country to train people up for some of the most important jobs in the world, such as teachers, and it showed how this investment can pay dividends for future generations. That is what this bill is about.</para>
<para>Over the next few decades, Australia will need around 80 per cent of its workforce to hold a certificate, diploma or degree. That reflects the transformation already underway in how we work, how we build and how we compete. The Australian Universities Accord is a blueprint for higher education reform over the next decade and beyond. This Albanese Labor government has already implemented more than 30 of its 47 recommendations. We doubled the number of university study hubs in regional and suburban areas. We introduced the National Student Ombudsman. We established the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, providing genuine stewardship for the tertiary sector. We've also cut HECS debts by 20 per cent. We introduced paid placements for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students, and recently the Albanese Labor government expanded paid prac to 10 more health and allied health professions.</para>
<para>Recently, with the Deputy Prime Minister, I had the pleasure of visiting Box Hill Hospital in my community, and there we met a number of students who are undertaking their placements. There were nursing students who would soon be able to benefit from paid prac. We also met a number of OT and physiotherapy students, who were very happy to hear about the government's announcement of paid prac, although, since they were doing their placements then, they weren't able to take advantage of it. You could see that they were juggling their part-time jobs as well as working full time to get that practical experience they needed to develop the skills to practice their profession. They also had to work as footy coaches or work in Big W at the same time, in order to get the accreditation they needed. Paid prac will mean that they'll be able to focus on their studies and get their qualifications without the stress of also having to work part-time jobs to pay their rent and pay their bills.</para>
<para>This bill delivers the next step. At its core, this legislation builds a new funding architecture for Australian higher education, one that is designed to grow the system, support those students who have historically been left behind and align Commonwealth investment with where it is needed most. The bill establishes a new managed-growth funding system. In practical terms, it effectively uncaps university places for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and from regional areas. Universities will be funded in proportion to the students they enrol and support. The more students a provider takes from a disadvantaged background, the more funding they will receive to help those students succeed. This is the same logic that underpins the Gonski funding for schools, and it works.</para>
<para>The legislation also introduces needs based funding. This is direct, targeted support for students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, First Nations students and those studying at regional campuses. The base equity amount is set at over $1,500 per student, and the base regional amount is around $1,400. That is more than double what was provided under similar previous programs, which in some cases was as little as $600 per student. Universities will be able to put that funding towards tutoring, mentoring, academic support, scholarships and offsetting the higher costs that come with regional campuses. These changes inject $3.6 billion into Australia's higher education system over the next decade. They are expected to result in an additional 230,000 commencing domestic students at universities across that period. That is 230,000 people whose path to a degree and the opportunities that come with it become possible because of this legislation.</para>
<para>Let us be clear about what those opposite have delivered when it comes to higher education. They cut university funding, they deregulated fees and they tried to drive up the cost of a degree. They allowed HECS debts to spiral, with indexation eating into balances faster than graduates and students could repay them. They underfunded the sector and stepped back from the role government has to play in ensuring Australia's skill base matches our economic needs. The result was a system that worked well for those who were already advantaged and left too many others behind.</para>
<para>This government has reversed that direction step by step. We cut 20 per cent from HECS debts. We changed the way debts are indexed so that it is the lower of either CPI or wage growth, restoring hope to students that they'll be able to pay off their student debt. We introduce paid placements so that student nurses, teachers, social workers, midwives and, more recently, pharmacists, OTs and physiotherapists are not forced to choose between their studies and paying rent. We established the ATEC so that tertiary education has genuine long-term stewardship and is not left to drift from one political cycle to the next. Now we are rebuilding the funding foundations.</para>
<para>Evidence based teaching is not just a phrase. At Templestowe Heights, it is the difference between a child who learns to read with confidence and one who falls further behind. Our broader school funding reforms are part of that same agenda: full and fair funding for every public school; billions of dollars in new investment, tied not to blind spending but to evidence about what actually improves education outcomes; phonics checks and numeracy checks to identify the children who need extra help; and small-group tutoring to give those children the support they deserve. This is the biggest new investment by an Australian government in public education. This bill extends that same logic upwards into the tertiary education system because the question is not simply whether a child learns to read in year 1; it is whether that child, 20 years later, can access the qualification they need to participate fully in the economy that we're building and to participate fully in the civic life that we all contribute to.</para>
<para>Menzies is one of the most sought-after places to live in Melbourne's east for a simple reason: families move to our area due to our outstanding schools. People really value education in our community. They move to places like Surrey Hills, Mont Albert, Doncaster, Doncaster East, Box Hill and Blackburn because they know their children will get an outstanding education. They plan their lives around school zones. They make financial sacrifices to get into those catchments. They make their single biggest investment—buying a home—based on which schools are within walking distance. That reflects decades of a community committed to education. It also reflects strong principals, dedicated teachers, parents who are involved and engaged, and a culture that takes learning seriously.</para>
<para>Menzies has some of the best schools in Victoria. Our public schools consistently perform at the highest levels. Our school communities are tight knit, diverse and ambitious for their children. What families in Menzies understand is that a great school is not just about the building; it's the foundation of a child's future. It shapes what is possible, and it determines what doors open for them later in life. That is exactly what this bill is about.</para>
<para>This bill matters because the decisions we make about education are decisions about what kind of country we want to be. Do we want to be a country that reserves opportunity for those born into it or a country that ensures equality of opportunity for everyone, regardless of their background, where they're from or what language they speak at home? Do we want to be country that talks about skills shortages while doing nothing to address the structural barriers keeping capable people out of university or a country that invests, plans and builds a tertiary education system that can actually deliver the workforce our future requires?</para>
<para>This government has made its choice, with 230,000 more students at university, needs based funding for those who need it most, a managed system built for the long term and a funding model that rewards universities for doing the hard work of genuine inclusion. Labor is the party that has opened the doors of Australian opportunity in our country and in education. This bill opens them wider. It opens them wider for students from regional areas and from disadvantaged backgrounds, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and for people like my mum, who will be the first in their family to go to university. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak to the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. I'll just say at the outset that the coalition hasn't finalised its position on the bill. We will refer this to a Senate committee for inquiry and report because, ultimately, we believe in evidence, and the evidence that comes through that committee will be vital for us in determining our final position. This bill takes a lot of focus because it makes significant structural changes to the higher education system.</para>
<para>I associate myself with some of the previous comments. Universities in this country matter. They matter not only in terms of the country we want to be but in terms of the calibre of our next generation. It's something that we can't discuss lightly. It's something that is very important to who we are as a country, and it will be very crucial to the country that we end up becoming over the years to come.</para>
<para>I think of the opportunities I received from the universities that I attended and the incredible support that they provided me. They were very much a foundation to my career and to the life that I set up. I had the opportunity to go to the Australian National University, here in the ACT, but I also had the opportunity to participate in international education overseas. I studied at universities in both China and the Netherlands. So I was able to get a more holistic and international insight into tertiary education, which gave me a view of what we do well but also of the areas that we need to do better in.</para>
<para>What we are seeing at the moment with our universities in Australia is very concerning. We're seeing under Labor that universities have become measurably worse. There are a few different categories that I think of when I make that statement. I look at research funding, I look at the culture that we've seen on university campuses and how that's changed in particular over the last couple of years and I look at overregulation. I represent the southern Gold Coast, and people on the southern Gold Coast are so fortunate to have two fantastic universities. We have Southern Cross University with the Coolangatta campus and we have Bond University, which is based at Varsity Lakes. They're both universities that I have had significant dealings with, not only during my time as the member for McPherson but also prior to that. They both provide education to the next generation of Australians that is not only practical but also relevant to where we live, not only on the Gold Coast but within the context of our broader Indo-Pacific region.</para>
<para>When I speak to the vice-chancellors of those universities, when I speak to the teaching staff and when I speak to the students, I hear, unfortunately, this view that it is becoming too difficult to run universities. It's becoming too difficult to compete with all of the regulations that government is imposing on them. That seems to be the common thread that I get when I ask for feedback amongst my universities. We're seeing the consequences of these challenges. We've seen domestic enrolments falling. I note that in 2022 there were 1.103 million domestic students at university, whereas, according to the most recent data, we've seen numbers fall since Labor came to office. In fact, we're at the lowest number since 2019.</para>
<para>Now, I respect that there is a role for us to educate international students. We not only get a financial benefit from doing so; we also get a long-term soft-power benefit. I've had the opportunity to speak to people who have come to this country and studied here and then gone overseas and become very senior in their fields, often in politics. They have a very different view of us as a country because of their experiences here. There is no doubt that that is important. But, if you ask me, when we're seeing domestic enrolments falling, Australian universities at their core should be focused on ensuring that we educate the next generation of Australians. On the current statistics, on the current numbers, we're not seeing that to be the case, at least to the extent that we would like to see it.</para>
<para>The second point I was making, in relation to overregulation—and this is the point that my universities on the Gold Coast have raised with me consistently—is that, according to the Department of Education, since 2022 the ratio of students to teaching staff has increased, and get this: the numbers of administrative, technical and operating staff are growing twice as fast as for teaching and research staff. That's the feedback that I also get. And the feedback more specifically from the universities has been that they're having to bring on extra staff to deal with the incredible obligations put on them by government.</para>
<para>From an ideological perspective, I've always been of the view that when government gets involved—whether it's in business, whether it's in the private sector or whether it's in universities—it doesn't always end well. There's sometimes a role for them to be involved, and there certainly is when it comes to universities. When universities are subject to TEQSA, to ATEC, to the new gender based violence commissioner and to the Ombudsman, they're not telling me that they're against what these people are asking them to do, that they're against adhering to certain standards. But they are saying that government should perhaps look at the consequences and the costs of implementation and the fact that universities, especially smaller universities, are having to bear those costs and having to adjust their teaching staff in favour of administrative staff and regulatory staff. At the end of the day, there is one cohort that misses out when universities have to do that, and that is the students, and the students should always be the focus and at the core of what we do when it comes to the education space.</para>
<para>I made reference to the changing culture on campus at universities. Over the last few years, what we've seen in Australia is very unrecognisable to me, as somebody who went through our tertiary education system not that long ago, quite frankly—about eight years ago. We see spectacle after spectacle, week after week, of encampments on university campuses in this country preaching hate not only against the country, which is bad enough in and of itself, but also against specific minority groups and particularly against the Jewish population in this country. I think it has been quite concerning to see that happening at places that should be beacons of thought and opportunities for debate. We've seen this across the country, and it's been reflected in data that's been acquired through the Racism@Uni survey, which found extraordinary levels of this sort of abuse, particularly against Jewish students and other groups.</para>
<para>When we have situations where our education system is handbraked by regulation or is handbraked by the decisions of this place, it results in consequences for our education rankings and our standards not only in Australia but around the world. We saw that when more than half of Australia's universities dropped in world rankings in June this year. Just to put some numbers to what I was saying about the regulation—I mentioned TEQSA and a few of the different regulatory bodies. TEQSA itself, I understand, lodged a submission recently which said that there are now at least 15 different regulators and oversight bodies that universities report to. As a member of the Australian public, as somebody who is probably going to be the beneficiary of the intellect of students at universities now at some point in the future, I do not want our educators or our universities to find themselves tied up dealing with these 15 different regulators and oversight bodies as well as the more than 300 pieces of legislation and regulation that they're required to adhere to and comply with.</para>
<para>So I say to this place—again, reserving the coalition's right to make a decision on this bill—that these are the sorts of highly pressing issues that need to be addressed, and I don't get the impression that those opposite are actually addressing these issues. This is the direct feedback that I've received, as the federal member for McPherson, from the universities that I represent. I also recently acquired the role of co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of International Students group. I had the opportunity only last week to meet with university representatives from around the country, and this was also a great part of the feedback we received. They feel very much handbraked by the regulation that's imposed by this place. As far as I can see in this legislation, in this universities accord bill, there's very little effort going to address those concerns and those issues, and that's something that we need to have a real conversation about.</para>
<para>I've been listening to some of the contributions from those opposite, and I think there's a mismatch between what the bill is actually about and what members opposite are saying the bill will do. Labor seems to be pretending that the bill is about funding student places and about increasing university funding for specific groups, such as Indigenous Australians, people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and people from rural and regional areas. But it's not actually right. You'll see it's not accurate when you read the content of the bill. You don't need this bill to do any of those things.</para>
<para>What the bill actually does is it centralises a significant amount of power over universities and higher education providers in the hands of the relevant minister. It moves our higher education system towards a centrally managed model. This means, practically, that the ministers and/or the minister and future ministers as well would gain extensive powers over domestic Commonwealth supported places, international student allocations, demand driven higher education course places, conditions imposed on providers, needs based funding, and priorities and directions given to ATEC. There's a good thing about this. It means that the powers could be used by a future government to address some serious policy problems or concerns. But, on the flip side, we have some concerns about competition, the autonomy of institutions, efficiency, parliamentary oversight and ministerial discretion. That's the essence of this bill.</para>
<para>So the four main concerns that I have centre, firstly, around competition. The bill is not based on competition, deregulation or institutional autonomy. It's based on central allocation and ministerial control. As such, the bill treats competition between universities as a problem. I don't associate myself with that view, because, at the end of the day, competition will benefit consumers. When it comes to competition between universities, that competition benefits the students themselves because it incentivises different universities, whether in my electorate or elsewhere, to compete on quality, on student experience, on career outcomes, on academic reputation and on course offerings.</para>
<para>There are a few parts of this bill that raise concerns, and I hope that a Senate inquiry will enable those concerns to be fleshed out more thoroughly. But, at the end of the day, it is important we're having this conversation. Australians and most people in this place—not everybody, and that's fine too; not everyone needs to go through university, and, in fact, we have a great deal of need outside the tertiary education system at the moment as well—will remember and recognise the influence that universities have had on their careers, their lives and the broader lives and experiences of Australians. It's important we get this right, actually listen to what the sector is telling us and don't just impose what we think the sector wants us to impose. The message that I've received from my constituents and from my universities is very clear: we're making it too difficult for them to do teaching and educate the next generation. And, when the focus is diverted away from that, we have a serious problem.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>These reforms reflect a simple belief, held by Labor governments for generations, that education should expand opportunity, not entrench disadvantage. From opening the doors to higher education under Hawke and Keating to the reforms that we are delivering today, Labor has always understood that investing in education is investing in Australia's future.</para>
<para>Bonner is home to almost 50 schools, and I've made it my mission to visit each and every one of them. You'll be pleased to know, Deputy Speaker, I am almost there—only a couple to go. From Bonner's largest school, at 4,000 students, Mansfield State High School—also the largest school in Australia—to my smallest school, at 45 students, Sinai College, I've met young people right across our community who are already thinking about what comes next after the school gates. I've met with budding investors at St Agnes Catholic Primary School. I've also had them visit parliament this week, and we've celebrated academic achievement across many schools, including last week at Holland Park State High School. We've seen firsthand the different ways our local schools are preparing young people for their futures. For many of those students, the next step will be university, and I want every young person that I meet in Bonner to know that, if they have the ability and ambition, opportunity is there for them, regardless of their postcode or their parents' income.</para>
<para>That is what the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 is all about. Education has always been one of the great engines of opportunity in this country. It changes lives, it strengthens communities, and it builds the skilled workforce that we need here in our country. But opportunity only works if the doors are actually open, and that is exactly what this legislation does. This bill is a major step in implementing the Universities Accord, the most significant review of higher education in a generation. Released in 2024, the accord sets out a blueprint for Australia's tertiary education system over the next decade and beyond. It recognises a simple reality: Australia's future workforce will need more skills than ever before, and our education system must be ready to meet that challenge.</para>
<para>This government doesn't just announce reform; we actually deliver it, and the Albanese Labor government has already implemented more than 30 of the accord's 47 recommendations in full or part. We have made HECS fairer, cutting 20 per cent off student debts, capping indexation, moving to a fairer repayment system and raising the minimum repayment threshold. In my electorate of Bonner, over 20,000 people have already had their student debt cut. We've introduced paid prac for the very first time for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students, and now we've expanded it to 10 more frontline health professions, so more students don't have to choose between completing their studies and paying the rent. We've doubled the number of university study hubs, establishing 20 new Regional University Study Hubs and 14 Suburban University Study Hubs, so students don't have to leave their community to get a start on a degree.</para>
<para>We've increased free university bridging courses. We've introduced the National Student Ombudsman and a national code to prevent and respond to gender based violence on campus. We made demand-driven, Commonwealth supported places available to every First Nation student who earns the marks to get in, and we established the Australian Tertiary Education Commission as steward of the system. This bill is the next step.</para>
<para>Australia is changing. The jobs of the future will demand new skills, new knowledge and new ways of thinking. Almost 9,000 people in my electorate are currently studying at university or in higher education. They are preparing to become the nurses, teachers, engineers, researchers and professionals our communities will rely on in the years ahead. This bill is about making sure more Australians have that same opportunity.</para>
<para>This legislation is the most significant reform to higher education funding in a generation. It represents an additional $3.6 billion investment in Australia's higher education system over the next decade, supporting around 230,000 additional domestic students to commence university. Importantly, the new managed growth funding system will effectively uncap Commonwealth supported places for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and regional Australia, helping ensure talented Australians are not held back by where they live or the circumstances they were born into. On a personal note, as someone who is from regional Queensland and the first in their family to go to university, I know how important that is.</para>
<para>For too long, universities have been expected to educate more Australians without the certainty that funding would keep pace with demand. That uncertainty makes it harder for universities to plan, invest and create the places students need. This legislation will address this by establishing a managed growth funding system that will support a bigger, better and fairer university sector. Over the next three years it will fund an additional 16,000 Commonwealth supported places each year. From 2030 that will increase to 19,000 additional places annually. Over the next decade around 230,000 more students are expected to commence university. Importantly, this growth will not be left to chance.</para>
<para>In Bonner, more than 45,000 families call our community home. As our electorate continues to grow, so too will the number of young people looking to take the next step into higher education. Planning for that demand now means more Australians will have the opportunity to pursue a university education in the years ahead.</para>
<para>The Australian Tertiary Education Commission will work with universities to allocate Commonwealth supported places where they are needed most, while ensuring universities have that certainty to plan for the future. It will also have the flexibility to allocate places for students from disadvantaged backgrounds and regional and remote communities, helping ensure opportunity reaches those who are too often missing. When a capable student earns their place, the availability of a university position should not be the barrier that stands in their way.</para>
<para>We know that opening the door to university is only part of the story. We also need to make sure that students have the support they need once they walk through that door to stay the course and graduate. Not every student starts from the same place, and their circumstances do not diminish their talent or their potential. Evidence tells us that students from a lower socioeconomic background and students from regional and remote Australia are not just less likely to start a university degree, they are also less likely to finish one. In fact, the data shows that they are twice as likely to drop out after their first year of university than other students.</para>
<para>That is why this bill introduces needs based funding. Just as the Gonski reforms recognised that schools needed additional support to help students facing disadvantage, this bill applies the same principle to higher education. Universities will receive additional funding for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, for First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses.</para>
<para>Under the previous arrangements, universities sometimes received as little as around $600 per eligible student. Under this legislation, the base equity amount will be over $1,500 per student and the regional amount over $1,300. In many cases, that is more than double the previous levels of support. That funding can be used for tutoring, mentoring, academic assistance, scholarship and emergency financial support. This reform is demand driven, meaning that, the more eligible students a university supports, the more funding it will receive. Opportunity is not just about getting a place at university; it is about making sure that every student has the support that they need to succeed once they get there. That is how we build a fairer education system and a stronger Australia.</para>
<para>This bill also strengthens the way international student numbers are managed. International education is one of Australia's greatest success stories. It enriches our campuses, strengthens research and innovation, supports thousands of jobs and makes a significant contribution to our economy. But growth needs to be well managed and well planned. This bill provides a clear framework for ATEC to independently allocate international student places, with the overall cap set by the minister in consultation with universities. It allows the commission to consider priorities such as student housing and market diversification, giving universities greater certainty while supporting sustainable growth.</para>
<para>The bill also makes technical amendments to improve information-sharing between agencies and ensure each body can carry out their roles effectively. This is sensible reform. It gives universities greater certainty, strengthens independent decision-making and helps make sure international education keeps growing in a way that's sustainable and serves the long-term interests of students, universities and the wider community.</para>
<para>This bill is not isolated reform. The Albanese Labor government has made education a priority. We have delivered the three-day guarantee so more children can access early education. We have delivered record funding for public schools, tied to meaningful reforms that help students catch up, keep up and finish school. And we have delivered a cut of 20 per cent to student debt and introduced paid prac. Each of these reforms has the same purpose: to remove barriers and create opportunity. Labor will always ensure that where someone starts in life does not determine where they can finish or what they can achieve.</para>
<para>Education is one of the greatest investments any government can make. In Bonner in my community, education is something more and it's also something that our community values. Almost one in three people in our electorate already hold a bachelor's degree. That reflects a community that understands the opportunities education creates. This bill is about ensuring those same opportunities remain within reach for the next generation.</para>
<para>This bill is about ensuring that talent is never held back by disadvantage. It's about a young person's future being determined by their ability and hard work, not their postcode or family circumstances. This is another important step towards a fairer higher education system, because talent has never been a problem in our country, but opportunity has. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I understand that the member for Pearce would like to present a copy of their speech for incorporation into <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>, in accordance with the resolution agreed to on 6 November 2025.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The incorporated speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<para>I would like to support the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 and to speak about why this reform matters so much to communities like mine in Pearce. At its core, this bill is about fairness, but, more than that, it is about whether we genuinely believe that every young Australian should have the same chance to succeed regardless of where they grow up or what their family circumstances are.</para>
<para>While we often say that, in Australia, anyone can get ahead, we know that isn't always how it plays out in practice. We know that talent is spread right across this country but opportunity is not, and that gap is not abstract. It is real and it shows up in very practical ways in people's lives. It shows up in whether a young person sees university as something that is within reach or something that is simply not for people like them. It shows up in whether families feel confident navigating the system or whether it feels confusing and out of step with their experience. And it shows up in the numbers—who gets to university and, just as importantly, who stays and finishes.</para>
<para>In outer metropolitan communities like Pearce, I see this every week. I meet young people who are capable, motivated and full of potential but who are weighing up decisions that go far beyond study. They are thinking about how they will afford rent, how many hours they will need to work, whether they can manage the cost of transport or whether they should put their plans on hold to support their family. For many, they are the first in their family to consider university at all. That is something to be proud of. But it can also mean stepping into a system without a clear map, and, even when they do take that step, too many find that the hardest part is not getting in. It is staying in. That is why this bill matters. It recognises that opening the door is only the beginning. What matters just as much is whether people are supported once they walk through it.</para>
<para>This legislation builds on the Australian Universities Accord, which was released in February 2024. That accord is a blueprint for higher education reform not only for the next decade but for the decade after that. It tells us something very important: if Australia wants to meet the skill demands of the future, we need to lift the proportion of people in the workforce with a certificate, diploma or degree to around 80 per cent over the coming decades. That means more people at TAFE. It means more people at university. And it means acting now to set our tertiary system up for the future.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government has already implemented more than 30 of the accord's 47 recommendations in full or in part. That includes making HECS fairer by cutting 20 per cent of HECS debts, capping indexation at the lower of CPI and WPI, moving to a marginal repayment system and raising the minimum repayment threshold. It includes introducing paid prac for the first time for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students. It includes doubling the number of university study hubs by establishing 20 new regional university study hubs and 14 suburban university study hubs. It includes increasing the number of free university bridging courses. It includes introducing the National Student Ombudsman and the National Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence. It includes making demand driven Commonwealth supported places available to all First Nations students where they meet the marks to get in. And it includes establishing the Australian Tertiary Education Commission as a steward of the tertiary education system.</para>
<para>This bill is the next step in that reform agenda. It enacts the accord's commitment through a new funding system built around a managed growth funding system and demand driven, needs based funding. It is designed to do two things at once: grow the system to meet national demand, and better support the students who have historically been left behind. On the first challenge—access—this bill introduces a new way of funding growth in higher education. The Universities Accord was clear that higher education funding should be planned and managed by the ATEC through mission based compacts. It was also clear that we need to increase the number of higher education students from under-represented backgrounds, while also focusing on their success once they arrive. This bill responds to that. It will better align Commonwealth funding with enrolments, address existing issues in the funding system and help ensure the system grows in a way that reflects the needs of the country.</para>
<para>It will also formalise the role of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission in allocating Commonwealth supported places. That is important because it gives us a more coordinated and transparent approach to growth instead of a system where institutions are left to compete in ways that do not always serve students or the system as a whole. Most importantly, the new Managed Growth Funding System will effectively uncap the number of places for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and regional areas. That is a major change. It means that opportunity will not be artificially limited for students who have the ability and the determination to succeed but who may not have had the same starting point as others. It means that, if you come from a background where university has not always felt like a normal option, the system will now be better designed to include you.</para>
<para>It is expected to deliver around 230,000 commencing domestic students at university over the next decade. That is not just a statistic. That is 230,000 individual stories. 230,000 chances for people to build a future, contribute to their communities and gain the skills our country needs. For communities such as Pearce, that matters deeply. We are growing, we are diverse and we are full of people who want to contribute—young people who have ambition, families who want to see their children succeed, communities that are investing in their future. They are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for a fair chance, for a system that recognises their potential, supports their effort, and gives them a pathway forward.</para>
<para>But access is only half the story, because getting into university does not guarantee finishing it. We know that students from disadvantaged backgrounds are significantly more likely to drop out, often in their first year. Again, this is not because they lack ability. It is because they are often managing much more than study alone. They are balancing work and classes. They are supporting families. They are trying to cover costs that others may not even have to think about. Sometimes it is textbooks. Sometimes it is transport. Sometimes it is the need to take on extra shifts. Sometimes it is simply feeling out of place and not knowing where to turn for help. These are the quiet barriers that can make the difference between completing a degree and walking away from it.</para>
<para>That is why the demand driven, needs based funding in this bill is so important. It recognises that equity is not just about giving people a chance to start. It is about giving them a fair chance to finish. This funding will provide additional support to students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses. Similar to Gonski funding for schools, the more students a university has who meet the criteria, the more funding it receives to help those students participate and succeed.</para>
<para>That support is practical and targeted. It can go towards tutoring for students who are struggling academically. It can go towards mentoring for those navigating an unfamiliar environment. It can support scholarships and grants. It can help universities offset the higher costs of campuses in regional and remote areas. And it can provide direct financial assistance when life throws up the unexpected.</para>
<para>The bill sets the base equity amount at $1,535 and the base regional amount at $1,398. That is more than double the average amount provided to universities per student last year under similar previous programs, which was as little as $600. That matters because it sends a very clear message: support is not an afterthought. It is part of the system. And the level of funding per student will more than double next year in some cases. That is significant. It is also necessary because, if we are serious about widening access, we must also be serious about keeping people on track once they get there.</para>
<para>This bill also strengthens the sustainability and integrity of the system itself. It provides a framework for the ATEC to exercise its existing function to allocate international student places where the Minister for Education makes an international allocation pool determination. That is a sensible and orderly approach and one that reflects the need for better planning and stewardship across the tertiary sector. It also makes small technical amendments to modernise information sharing between the Commonwealth Ombudsman, TEQSA and the ATEC so that those bodies can inform their work appropriately. These may sound like technical changes, but they are part of something larger. They help create a system that is more coordinated, more transparent and better able to respond to change.</para>
<para>This bill is not about one part of the system in isolation. It is about the whole picture. It is about access. It is about participation. It is about success. And it is about making sure our higher education system is built for the Australia we actually live in, not the Australia of decades past. If we believe in fairness, then opportunity must be genuinely accessible. If we believe in aspiration, then pathways must be open. And, if we believe in hard work, then effort should be rewarded with real opportunity. This bill moves us closer to that.</para>
<para>It does not solve every challenge in our education system, and we know there is more work ahead. But it is a meaningful and practical step. It invests in students, it invests in universities and, most importantly, it invests in the future of the country. It widens the door of opportunity—and, just as importantly, it helps ensure that, once people walk through that door, they have the support they need to keep going. That is how we build not just a better education system but a fairer country.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Education is one of the great equalising forces in our society. It can be life's biggest game changer, the catalyst that changes the course of a person's life. It can open up opportunities that once seemed out of reach. It can give a young person the skills, confidence and qualifications to build a career, support their family and contribute to community. It can be the key to a new career when returning to work after starting a family. But, for this to be true, access to education cannot depend on your postcode, your parents' income or whether you happen to grow up in a major city. Access to quality higher education must instead be available to all, and that is the principle at the heart of this bill, the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026.</para>
<para>In simple terms, it's about backing in the young person who has the marks and ambition to go to university but wonders whether they can afford it. It is about the student from a regional community who has always dreamed of becoming a teacher, a nurse, an engineer or a lawyer but worries about having to move away from home; it is about the first person in a family, just like the member for Bonner, who just spoke, to go to university navigating a system that their parents may never have experienced themselves; and it is about making sure that, when those students get through the university door, they have the support to stay at university and finish their degree. That is why this bill is so important.</para>
<para>This bill builds a stronger, fairer system by creating a new managed-growth funding system for Commonwealth supported places. In practice, this means the government will set the total number of funded places and the Australian Tertiary Education Commission will allocate those places between universities, with additional places directed to areas of greatest need and demand. That means universities have greater certainty about their funded places while more opportunities can be directed to students from disadvantaged and regional backgrounds.</para>
<para>This is important because our nation already has more Australians studying at university than ever before, and that number is going to continue to grow. The Albanese government is backing in that growth. Next year, there will be an additional 16,000 funded Commonwealth supported places. There will be another 16,000 the year after that and another 16,000 the year after that. By 2030, there will be 19,000 additional fully-funded Commonwealth supported places. Across the next decade, the government expects to fund an additional 230,000 commencing students at university. That is a significant investment in the future of Australians, and the important point is this is not growth for growth's sake. The system is designed to make sure those opportunities reach Australians who have historically been less likely to access university—students like those in my electorate of Corangamite, a regional electorate.</para>
<para>The Australian Tertiary Education Commission will have responsibility for allocating Commonwealth supported places to universities and other eligible providers. Each university's allocation will include a core student load, providing stability, as well as an additional growth allocation. That additional growth allocation is where this reform can make a real difference. It gives the ATEC the ability to direct additional places to areas where they are most needed, including students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and students from regional and rural communities. That matters enormously. If ATEC determines that the total allocation pool is not sufficient to meet demand from students from disadvantaged backgrounds or regional and rural areas, it can ask the minister to increase that pool. In other words, we're building a system that can grow where the need is greatest. That is a very different approach to that of the former, coalition government, which did little to ensure equitable access to higher education.</para>
<para>The second major reform in this bill is needs based funding for universities. There is a very clear reason for this. We know that students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and students from regional or rural communities are less likely to commence a university degree. We also know they are less likely to complete one. The data shows that these students can be twice as likely to leave university after their first year. This is not because they are less capable; it is because the barriers they face can be greater. The bill provides additional funding for things like tutoring, mentoring and academic support, as well as direct financial assistance through scholarships and emergency grants. Importantly, this funding will be demand driven. It will target need.</para>
<para>That is a significant change. Under previous arrangements, programs such as the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program provided important support, but funding was capped. It should be noted that the more eligible students a university has, the more funding it will receive. Put simply, this means there is greater emphasis on attracting and keeping students who come from regional and remote areas. The more students there are at a regional campus, the more funding the university receives. The bill sets a base equity amount of $1,535 per eligible student and a base regional amount of $1,398 per regional student, with both amounts indexed each year. Under the previous HEPPP arrangements, the average amount provided last year to universities per student was around $600. Under this new needs based funding system it will be more than double. This means universities can use funding in a timely way that responds to the immediate needs of its students, so they are supported.</para>
<para>That is a substantial and meaningful investment. But what matters most is that that investment makes many things possible. It is especially important for regional universities and campuses. In my electorate of Corangamite, Deakin University is a major part of our community. Deakin plays an important role in opening the doors of higher education to students who may otherwise have found university much harder to access. Deakin provides opportunities for students to study close to home. It contributes significantly to the local economy. It supports local employers with highly skilled graduates. It conducts research that benefits our community and the broader region. And, importantly, it creates pathways for students from a wide range of backgrounds.</para>
<para>I work with Deakin and engage regularly with students, because I see the difference the right support can make. For a student, having access to university is important, particularly one close to home. Just as important is knowing there is somewhere and someone to turn to when things get difficult. We need universities to be places where students can succeed, not simply places where students can enrol. That is why the needs based funding component of this bill is so important. It recognises that universities that are serving communities that have greater need require the resources to respond to that need. This is the same basic principle that underpins needs based school funding. If we accept that schools should receive additional resources because of the circumstances of the students they educate, it makes sense to apply that same principle when thinking about higher education. This bill does exactly that.</para>
<para>The bill is also about preparing Australia for the future. The Universities Accord provides a long-term vision for our higher education system. By 2050 Australia will need a workforce in which about 80 per cent of people have a TAFE qualification or a university degree. This is a huge challenge, but it is also a huge opportunity. We must ensure that Australians from every part of our nation can participate and contribute to a changing workforce. That means expanding access to tertiary education. It means better harmonising VET, vocational education, and higher education. It means working closely with our universities. And it means backing in free TAFE. It also means ensuring that regional communities aren't left behind. So investing in higher education is not simply an investment in individual students. It is an investment in the strength and resilience of our communities.</para>
<para>This bill also gives the Australian Tertiary Education Commission the tools to manage the growth of the system. This matters, because we need a higher education system that is coordinated, nimble and sustainable. We need universities to have certainty about their funding. We need students to have access to places. And we need public investment to be directed where it can deliver the greatest benefit.</para>
<para>The bill also provides transitional arrangements for universities as the new system comes into effect. This is important. Reforms of this scale need to be implemented carefully, with universities given the stability they need to plan for the future.</para>
<para>There is a reason education features so prominently in the story of Labor governments. We understand that education can change the trajectory of a person's life. As a former teacher I've seen that many times. Education is the key, and I believe in it. We understand that a child who has the opportunity to learn can become an adult who has choices, and we understand that when we invest in people we strengthen our nation.</para>
<para>For my electorate, these reforms are real and practical. They mean more opportunities for young people who want to study. When I speak with many young people in my electorate I hear a consistent message. They do not expect everything to be handed to them. They want to work hard. They want to build a career. They want to contribute. The way we can deliver this is by removing the barriers and implementing reform that creates a fairer, more supportive and more accessible higher education system.</para>
<para>This bill is an investment in students, it's an investment in our universities, it's an investment in regional Australia and ultimately it's an investment in Australia's future. Talent is everywhere. Our job is to make sure opportunity is, too. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JORDAN-BAIRD</name>
    <name.id>316021</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On this side of the House we believe something simple: no matter where in Australia you live or how much money your parents make, you deserve the same opportunities as your fellow Australians. This simple principle underpins the work of the Australian Labor Party and the changes that we in this government push for. It underpins a fair go for all Australians and it underpins this bill, which I am honoured to stand and speak on today. The name of the bill, the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026, reflects something the Prime Minister said on election night last year and which was repeated by the Minister for Education when he introduced the bill: that we are committed to opening the doors of opportunity for Australians a little bit wider.</para>
<para>In Australia right now, not everyone has the same access to higher education. Close to 50 per cent of Australians in their 30s have a university degree, but it's only about half that for those who grew up in a poor family or in the regions. It's even less in the bush. Young people who grow up outside our major cities or who are born into lower-income families are less likely to have the opportunity to go to uni and, if they do go, are less likely to finish their studies. That's not right, and that's the issue this bill is addressing.</para>
<para>But it's not new for the Albanese Labor government to make the right changes for a fairer education system. We've seen fairer access to education, with cheaper child care, the three-day childcare guarantee and the Better and Fairer Schools Agreement, all while investing in the fantastic educators at these early learning centres, backing this incredible workforce all the way with a 15 per cent pay rise.</para>
<para>I have one of the youngest electorates in the country, and, with 10 babies born in the city of Melton every day, we're growing. So many centres are being built and opened in the western suburbs, and we're building even more of these through our $1 billion Building Early Education Fund, meaning more not-for-profit early learning centres in areas where families need them most, like Garrong Early Learning Victoria, which I was proud to open, alongside our Minister for Education and Minister for Early Childhood Education. And just a few weeks ago, alongside the Victorian government, I announced a new early learning centre in Rockbank. This will be co-located with a brand new school that will open at the same time in 2028. When I had a look at the site a few weeks ago it was just an empty field, and I'm so excited to see construction kick off in coming months.</para>
<para>Access to education starts early, and early childhood education sets up a child's education journey throughout their life. It's why projects like this are so incredibly important. No matter where in Australia you were born, you deserve fair access to education throughout your entire education journey. I'd like to commend the Victorian Labor government for working with our educators, who support our kids every day, to deliver a significant pay rise and better working conditions, which the AEU voted in favour of on Monday.</para>
<para>Through the Better and Fairer Schools Agreement, we've now struck some really important agreements with every state and territory across this country to fix this funding problem. Twenty billion dollars will go to our public schools across the country over the next 10 years. This will see the Commonwealth increase its contribution to the schooling resource standard, putting every public school on a path to receive full funding.</para>
<para>There will be an extra $3.5 billion for Victorian public schools over the next 10 years. It will be tied to real reforms—the sorts of reforms we need in our schools to help more kids who fall behind catch up and keep up and to help more kids finish secondary school. That's what we need, because, in the years ahead, more jobs are going to require young people to finish high school and then go on to university or TAFE. This bill is making sure the next step to university is within reach for young Australians.</para>
<para>What's significant about this bill is that we're making some important changes to the way our higher education system is funded and managed. The number of students going to university is growing, and we need to address the challenges that can come with that. So we're creating a new managed growth funding system, and we're giving the Australian Tertiary Education Commission the tools to manage that growth. The minister will set the total pool of Commonwealth supported places, and ATEC will then allocate those places to universities and other eligible providers. Each university will receive a core allocation. This will help make sure universities don't go backwards and will help make sure they can receive additional places through a growth allocation.</para>
<para>The ATEC can use this growth allocation to put places, including those for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and from regional and remote areas, where they are most needed, meaning the system can better respond to demand from these students. Where demand from these groups is greater than the number of available places, ATEC can ask the minister to increase the total allocation pool.</para>
<para>We're basically setting up the system to allow growth to meet demand from students who have traditionally been underrepresented at uni. In outer suburban Melbourne—for example, in our western suburbs—sure, university is technically an option. But it isn't always accessible. Whether it's the financial demands a household faces or even the commute to get to uni, these barriers can prevent young Australians from pursuing and finishing their degrees. That's why this bill also introduces a new needs based funding system. This additional funding for university is based on the needs of their students. It will support students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and students studying at regional campuses. The more eligible students a university has, the more funding it will receive. This is different from previous programs where the funding was capped. The funding will be demand driven, and universities can use this funding for practical support like tutoring and mentoring, academic support, scholarships or emergency grants. It can also help universities meet the higher cost of operating regional and remote campuses.</para>
<para>We're also formalising ATEC's role in allocating Commonwealth supported places, giving one body responsibility for managing the growth of the system. We're also dealing with the matter of international student allocations. We will also continue to set a national planning level for international students. In this bill, there is no new statutory cap on international students. Instead, where the government sets a national planning level, the ATEC will allocate places between individual universities and other higher education providers. The minister can set the overall allocation pool and require ATEC to take certain government priorities into account, but the actual allocation of places between providers will be made by the ATEC.</para>
<para>Finally, the bill will make some technical changes to allow information to be shared between the ATEC, TEQSA and the Commonwealth Ombudsman. This will inform the work of these bodies and help them to carry out their functions.</para>
<para>In simple terms, we're changing how university places are allocated, how universities are funded for disadvantaged and regional students and how growth across the higher education system is managed. We're giving the ATEC the tools to manage that growth and directing more funding towards students and communities that have historically been less likely to access and complete university. We're opening the door of opportunity for future generations across Australia.</para>
<para>In my own community in Melbourne's west, I recently had the privilege of visiting Copperfield College in Sydenham, where I participated in the Be Bold Be Heard program alongside an inspiring panel of women from across my local community. Be Bold Be Heard is an outstanding leadership and advocacy initiative that empowers young women to become confident change-makers within their schools. At a recent visit to St Mary MacKillop Primary School, I spoke with the students in grade 5 about civics. At CRC North Keilor, I recently took part in their awards assembly, a moment for students' achievements to be recognised and preparing them to take their next steps through their education into work, TAFE or uni.</para>
<para>My local schools and the incredible work of their student cohorts are a reminder that talent is everywhere and hard work is everywhere. Where there is talent, drive and hard work, young Aussies should be supported to pursue their futures through higher education. Whatever suburb a young person grows up in or what their parents earn should not determine whether they get a crack at university. That is what this bill is about.</para>
<para>I meet young people in the community every day, and I'm always in awe of the passion and contributions they bring to our local communities. Just this week, we have had our local youth parliamentarian for Gorton, Gunmay. I'm so incredibly proud to have him here in Canberra. He's busy at Old Parliament House today debating intergenerational fairness, a real issue facing young people and one which is really well illustrated by the rising cost of university and the need for fair access to higher education. Gunmay, along with the cohort of young parliamentarians, has been discussing how the laws that we debate and pass here in parliament can last into the future. I trust that this bill serves as an example of one that has deep impacts for future generations, because education and fair access to education is truly life changing. Access to university creates real, lasting intergenerational change.</para>
<para>I recently visited the Marian Centre in Ravenhall and met an incredible group of young people, a number of them students in the allied health sector. These students have been completing their prac placements without any financial supports to account for the fact that their training prevents them from taking up an income. Paid pracs will change that. Prac payments are an education and training payment designed to give people a bit of extra help to get the qualifications they need and that we need to get more people working in the industries where we need them most. We've recently introduced paid pracs for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students. When unpaid hours spent working at mandatory practical placements are a barrier to young Aussies completing their education and when it's in those industries where we need a strong workforce, something needs to change to support these students. Paid prac is a natural choice because teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students deserve the right supports to complete their degrees and enter the workforce. This is increasing access to opportunities and having a real impact on people's lives and their futures as well.</para>
<para>Part of having accessible education means making sure student debt remains fair. This is not the first time I've spoken in this chamber about this, but it's worth repeating. The very first piece of legislation that passed this parliament was the wiping of every student debt by 20 per cent. This wiped $16 billion in student debt for over 3.2 million Australians, including 26,000 Australians in my electorate of Gorton, and made sure that student debt doesn't grow faster than wages. We have double the number of university study hubs in the regions and, for the first time, have established them in our outer suburbs to bring university closer to where people live. It's wonderful that we have one located at the Melton Library and Learning Hub, in my friend the member for Hawke's electorate. Nearly half of young Australians have a degree, but this is not the case in the western suburbs. The evidence shows that, where study hubs are, university participation goes up. This new study hub in Melton will give residents in my community from Thornhill Park and Fraser Rise the chance to study and grow closer to home.</para>
<para>Education is a pathway to opportunity, and the Albanese Labor government knows that opportunity should not be restricted by where you live or how much your parents earn. What should matter is your ability, your hard work and your determination. That is the principle that this bill is protecting, opening the doors of opportunity just a little bit wider so more young Aussies can get the education and build the future they deserve. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It being almost 13.30, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member doesn't require leave to continue, but, when the debate is resumed, we'll move to the next speaker.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>54</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Goods and Services Tax</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Productivity Commission's interim report describes the 2018 GST deal as a mistake. I want to explain to this House why I disagree. Before 2018, WA's GST relativity had fallen to 30c in the dollar and was heading for 18c or lower. No state has ever received a smaller share. Even now, with the 75c floor in place, Western Australians received the lowest per capita GST share in the country.</para>
<para>The pre-2018 formula also created a strange set of incentives: a state that developed its mining industry saw its GST allocation fall; a state that expanded its gambling industry did not. The formula promoted pokies and penalised productivity. The reformed framework with a relativity floor helps realign incentives with the national interest by ensuring that states are not financially penalised for responsible resource development.</para>
<para>WA produces nearly half this nation's exports, including the critical minerals we need for clean energy, advanced manufacturing and Defence supply chains. Penalising that development harms the whole country, not just my state. The floor also protects every other state. Any state with concentrated or cyclical revenue could depend on it one day. I urge the commission to, before the final report, recognise that WA's contribution to the national economy funds services in every state. It must stay.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>51st Anniversary of Falintil</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Tomorrow is the 51st anniversary of Falintil, Forcas Armadas da Libertacao Nacional de Timor-Leste. I want to acknowledge a great group of Australian veterans that are attending those anniversary commemorations as part of the Timor Awakening program. This is a peer-to-peer veteran wellbeing program that includes an 11-day immersive experience in Timor-Leste, where those participants are involved in hands-on community development.</para>
<para>I caught up with the latest Timor Awakening group—the 40th group—in Darwin on their way over to Dili. Mick Stone, president of Veterans Care Association, runs the program. This program will be the largest foreign delegation in attendance at Falintil's 51st anniversary commemorations. These commemorations will be attended by President Jose Ramos-Horta and Chief of the Defence Force, General Falur Rate Laek. My brother, Lieutenant Colonel Dan Gosling, Mick Stone and I all worked with General Falur as he and his fellow guerrilla leaders were transitioning from a guerrilla force into a modern military. Mick and I also worked with Jose Ramos-Horta during his first presidential term and have maintained our friendship ever since. My very best regards to Falintil on their 51st anniversary and their commitment to Timor-Leste's future and to reconciliation.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Farrer Electorate: Health Care</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FARLEY</name>
    <name.id>62329</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to update you on health and health services in Farrer. Farrer is one of the nation's largest electorates, and every community across it, from Pooncarie to Albury, shares the same demand for a doctor, a hospital bed and an ambulance. In the south-east of Farrer, health services are progressing. The middle and west of Farrer are lagging in investment.</para>
<para>The Albury-Wodonga hospital has reached a milestone. The main Albury works planning application for the new seven-storey clinical services building is now on exhibition, bringing new and enhanced health services for the border communities a step closer. It also represents one of the largest regional hospital investments delivered in New South Wales, significantly expanding health services, bed capacity and specialist care for the growing region.</para>
<para>Corowa redevelopment is exactly what the region needs, delivering 24-hour emergency services, a safe room, increased inpatient beds, a new close observation unit, a fully integrated operating theatre, expanded radiology and new CT services, X-ray and ultrasound plus chair based service areas. Critically, it also includes the dedicated staff accommodation, because you cannot secure clinicians without a place for them to live.</para>
<para>Health services in Farrer are progressing in the right direction and must continue to do so. The future in health is built when all three levels of government are working together—a future we make, ensuring that intergenerational growth is continuous. Securing the future of health is made by the constituency— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Key Apprenticeship Program</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If you want to build more homes, there's one thing we absolutely need: the tradies to build them. It's the chippies, sparkies, plumbers and apprentices who are on the tools early every morning, learning their trade and quite literally building our communities.</para>
<para>I'm particularly proud of the more than 400 construction apprentices in Bonner who are among the 32,000 Australians getting a start through the Albanese Labor government's Key Apprenticeship Program. For a young apprentice, getting started isn't cheap. There are tools, boots and work gear to buy, training costs and plenty of fuel going to and from work sites. That's why eligible full-time apprentices can receive $10,000 over their apprenticeship. Importantly, this program isn't just backing apprentices but also the small businesses that give them their start. Almost 85 per cent of apprentices supported through the program are employed by small business.</para>
<para>And we're getting young people started early; half of the apprentices are 19 or younger, giving thousands of young Australians a pathway straight from school into a skilled, secure career, where they can earn while they learn. Labor is backing young people who want to learn a trade, the small businesses willing to give them a go and the skilled workforce Australia needs.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Youth Parliament</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This week, Parliament House is hosting the inaugural National Youth Parliament, bringing together 150 exceptional young Australians from across the country. Selected from over 2,200 applicants, these 16- and 17-year-olds, one from each of our electorates, have spent the week developing their leadership skills, debating, learning and critical thinking, as well as meeting with MPs.</para>
<para>I was delighted to meet with a group of students from across Australia, including several from South Australian electorates. They came armed with thoughtful and insightful questions on how parliament works, the role of the crossbench committees and the balance of power, as well as policy issue discussion on tobacco, gambling and AUKUS. We also discussed how the three levels of government work, and we talked about responding to disasters and emergencies.</para>
<para>A particular highlight for me was meeting Harry from Mayo—hopefully a future member for Mayo. Congratulations to all 150 students selected for this fantastic program. It's wonderful to see. I think they are such an impressive group of young people, who are engaging in democracy and thinking seriously about how they can shape our nation. I'd particularly like to acknowledge the Speaker for his tremendous leadership with this program. It really is fantastic, and I hope that it happens many years to come.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Brisbane Electorate: Energy</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JARRETT</name>
    <name.id>298574</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The people of Brisbane care about our environment, and they support the country's transition to renewables. In 2022, as the candidate for Brisbane, Minister Bowen and I announced that, under Labor, Brisbane would get a community battery.</para>
<para>As we know, community batteries are collective energy banks for businesses, homes and community organisations that don't have the means to store their own energy. Importantly, they're critical as we transition to renewables and remove fossil fuels from our energy mix, and they're critical to bringing down power costs for many people in my community of Brisbane.</para>
<para>But, since 2022, the LNP Brisbane City Council has used every excuse under the sun to block the community battery from being delivered. My favourite was that it would take up too much green space. I'd like to remind the LNP Council that the batteries are only the size of a small car, and, even if it were true, the benefits to the community, the benefits to families and the benefits to the environment far outweigh that challenge.</para>
<para>It is now 2026, and the LNP Brisbane City Council are still playing politics. It's not just about Brisbane; that council continues to block a community battery in my neighbouring seats of Ryan and Lilley. That's three in total. This has gone on far too long, and I call on the LNP council to find a suitable location so that the battery the federal government has ready, which is sitting in a storage shed, can be delivered to the people of Brisbane. It's what they want, and it's what they need.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wood, Mr Tony</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAWKE</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
    <electorate>Mitchell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to mark the life of Tony Wood, a fervent antidrug campaigner and, the House will remember, the father of Anna Wood, who was just 15 when she took an ecstasy tablet in the Phoenician nightclub in Sydney and died, Marking for a generation the dangers of drug use. As a young man, I found myself in New York with her mum, Angela Wood, at a conference where, as a young person who lost my own mother with a mother who lost her daughter, we formed a bond that has lasted for many years. In state parliament, I was able to help Anna's mum and dad, Angela and Tony, campaign against drugs in schools across New South Wales and in Sydney. In fact, just one week after the death of their daughter, they started a foundation called Love This Life—the iconic Anna Wood's life—saving the lives of tens of thousands of young people across New South Wales and around Sydney.</para>
<para>It was a great privilege to know them. It was a great privilege to know Tony and Anna. We shared many views about the inadequacies of harm minimisation and some of the policies that have been adopted in modern years by governments that simply aren't sufficient to teach young kids about the dangers of drug use. There's nothing more effective than parents who have lost a daughter going to schools and speaking with young adults about the dangers of drug use and about loving their life. I want to commend to the House the lives of Tony and Angela Wood, both of whom have passed away, and this remarkable family, this remarkable Sydney story and this remarkable Australian story that has saved the lives of so many young people.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Corda, Mr Jesse</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Every life in public service is shaped by people whose names may never appear on a ballot paper but whose loyalty, sacrifice and belief make that service possible. For me, one of those people is Jesse Korda. Jesse has been there since the beginning. From preselection in 2021 through elections fought on the streets of the Central Coast and through long nights, hard days and moments when the outcome was far from certain, Jesse stood beside me. He did so not for recognition or headlines but because Jesse believes in service. As a son of the Central Coast, Jesse has given back to the community that raised him. He has served the people of Robertson with compassion and determination, and through his work in the Australian parliament he has served his country with distinction.</para>
<para>There are sacrifices in political life that the public will never see—the missed weekends, late-night phone calls, burdens carried quietly and moments when duty comes before everything else. Jesse gave those things generously. There are moments in my own journey that simply would not have been possible without him. Titles come and go, offices change and elections are won and lost, but character endures. Jesse's character—his loyalty, his decency, his courage and his unwavering commitment to others—is something I will remember long after our time in this place is over. Jesse, you have served the Central Coast, you have served this parliament and you have served Australia. I wish you every success, every happiness and every opportunity in the years ahead.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Davis, Hunter</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to welcome and congratulate Hunter Davis, our passionate youth member for Cowper, who is here in parliament this week as part of the National Youth Parliament program. A proud Port Macquarie local, Hunter is no stranger to regional representation, having been awarded the 2026 Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Young Citizen of the Year award. Hunter passionately volunteers across conservation, parish and major community events and was last year here in Canberra as an ABC Heywire competition winner. I'd like to read from part of his entry, where he says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Growing up it was always mum and me against the world.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">She worked two jobs, gave up her dreams, and still showed me unconditional love.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mum grew up in housing commission.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">She never got the chance to go to university.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But she made sure I had every opportunity she didn't.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Even when we were living out of a suitcase she kept me in a good school.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">She'd say, "I didn't get this, but you will."</para></quote>
<para>Well, mate, you have taken every opportunity that your dedicated mum has provided you with both hands. She must be so incredibly proud of the impressive young man you have become. On behalf of our electorate, I'd like to say how proud the Cowper community is to have you. Thank you for representing our region's youth here in Canberra, and I look forward to your speech this afternoon.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hooper, Ms Lily</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BERRY</name>
    <name.id>23497</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A search is ongoing for Lily Hooper, an 18-year-old woman who was last seen heading out for a bushwalk a week ago in Nattai National Park in my electorate of Whitlam. Our thoughts are with Lily, her family and everyone who knows and loves her. Lily's disappearance has been a source of worry and concern for many people in the community, and at this incredibly difficult time our thoughts are with her, her family and her loved ones, who are facing unimaginable worry and uncertainty.</para>
<para>On behalf of the community, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to everyone involved in the multi-agency response to Lily's disappearance. To the police officers, SES and RFS volunteers, specialist search teams, helicopter crews and everyone working tirelessly across the challenging terrain of Nattai National Park to search for Lily we say thank you. Your dedication, courage and determination in searching through challenging conditions demonstrates an extraordinary commitment to bringing Lily home. We recognise the long hours, difficult conditions and emotional strain on everyone involved. We're incredibly grateful for everything you're doing.</para>
<para>Lily's family and loved ones are at the forefront of our thoughts. To Lily's family: please know that so many people in the community are thinking of you and hoping for Lily's safe return. We stand with you. You're in our thoughts at this incredibly difficult time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAFFEY</name>
    <name.id>316312</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Australian dream is a home among the gum trees, a place where you can put your feet up at the end of the day, a place to call your own. But this Labor government is demolishing the Australian dream. With the cost of living barely survivable, homeownership is not the Australian dream but a pipe dream. Labor's budget measures have thrown the housing sector into absolute chaos.</para>
<para>Now many, many, many Australians who cannot afford to buy or who need to rent are caught up in the middle of this housing crisis. There are fewer homes, higher rents and landlords who have absolutely lost confidence in the market. Australia's biggest rental property manager, Ray White Real Estate, says investors will have to raise rents by about 30 per cent to cover their losses. Mortgage applications are down, and housing availability is down.</para>
<para>What does it look like outside in the real world, outside of the Labor owned policy machine? It looks like a family in Bourke who can't afford to pay their rent. It looks like a couple in Narrabri who must move to save enough money for the impossible dream of owning their own home. It looks like a single mother who cannot find anywhere affordable enough to put a roof over her children's heads. Housing should be a simple right in Australia, and, under this government, the home among the gum trees is looking more like a home on the streets.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The NDIS is, at its heart, about people who want the same things we all want—to live with dignity, to have choices, to feel included and to have the opportunity to make the most of their lives. For many participants in their families, the NDIS has brought hope and opened doors that may have once seemed out of reach. It can provide the support someone needs to live more independently, pursue education or employment, build relationships or simply participate in their community.</para>
<para>For participants and their families, decisions about funding and support can feel deeply personal because they directly affect everyday life. That is why participants must always be at the centre of how we continue to improve the scheme. We need to listen to participants, families, carers and providers and understand that behind every plan is a person with their own circumstances, hope and aspirations. Reforming and strengthening the NDIS is about making sure the right supports reach the right people at the right time while giving participants confidence and certainty about their future. Above all, we should never lose sight of what the NDIS is really about: helping people with disability live fulfilling lives with choice, dignity, independence and the opportunity to belong.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Whenever I go doorknocking around Toowoomba, I ask people the same thing. I ask them what they would change about Australia. So often the answer is the same—the economy and housing. I hear the economy and housing over and over again. That's what I hear.</para>
<para>In Middle Ridge I met a young teacher. He's married. He's got a young child. They're starting out in life, doing all the things that we ask young Australians to do. But his rent has almost doubled. He's renting a house he could never afford to buy, and with rent, groceries, electricity and the cost of raising a child, there is no way he can save money for a deposit. He can't see how he will ever own his own home in Australia.</para>
<para>I hear versions of that same story over and over again everywhere I go. Young Australians are looking at their parents and their grandparents and they see generations who could work hard, save, buy a home and build a pathway to prosperity and security. That pathway has been blocked by this Labor government. That pathway has been taken away from young Australians who wanted to have that Australian dream that we all had, who wanted to imagine themselves working hard, getting a good job, being able to build a future for their kids and have a place that they can call home.</para>
<para>This budget has absolutely smashed that dream. It's taken it away from them. It's hurt Australians. It's hurt our future. It's taken confidence away from the market, and it's driving rents up, week after week. That Australian dream is disappearing, and that's happening on Labor's watch.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Goldie, Mr Dale Keith OAM</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to pay tribute to a local legend, Dale Goldie OAM, who passed away on 16 July, and acknowledge the extraordinary legacy he leaves in Kearsley and across our Hunter community. Dale was a mate, a proud local and, for more than 70 years, one of the true pillars of Kearsley. He was the sort of person who'd see something that needed doing, roll his sleeves up and just get it done. He never looked for recognition. He simply wanted to make his community stronger.</para>
<para>I saw that firsthand when I helped Dale secure the grant for the Kearsley Community Dawn Service Committee. Dale made every dollar count in that grant, including putting it towards a new ride-on mower so the grounds could be kept immaculate. That was Dale—practical, generous and always thinking of others. Even through the challenges of the past 18 months, his commitment never wavered. He gave everything he could to ensure Kearsley's Anzac Day dawn service remained meaningful, respectful and dignified. His passing leaves an enormous hole in the community he loved so deeply. My thoughts are with his wife, Michelle; his daughter, Natalie; his son, Dallas; and all his family and friends. The Hunter is a better place because you called it home. Dale, thank you for everything you gave to Kearsley. Your service, your kindness and example will never, ever be forgotten. Thank you, Dale.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor has delivered a trifecta of failure when it comes to housing—fewer homes, higher rents and confidence in the market absolutely smashed. They are making it harder for all Australians to buy a house, including first home buyers. As an example, Westpac mortgages applications have dropped 20 per cent since Labor's budget in May. What this government fails to understand is that if no-one buys a house, no-one will be able to rent a house, and there'll be no new first home owners.</para>
<para>We are seeing multiple reports of significant increases in rents in Australia. Labor said that rents would only go up $2 a week. NAB data shows it will be more like $250 a week in Sydney, based on median results. You definitely wouldn't want to live in the Treasurer's electorate, given the reports we've seen today. While this government grandstands about pushing new taxes on Australians, the home owners in my electorate aren't celebrating their home values falling. The renters aren't celebrating a 50 per cent increase in rents. We know Australians want a solution to the challenges they face. That's why the coalition has a plan to tie migration to housing to make sure we're not bringing in more people that we can house. We're going to unlock 400,000 new homes, through investing in infrastructure, to serve all Australians.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bullying No Way Week</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This week is Bullying No Way Week, which is a national week of action that unites government, Catholic and independent schools, and their communities, across the country. This year's theme is 'Small Acts, Big Impact'. Calling out and stopping bullying, whether it be physical, verbal or online, is everyone's responsibility, and small acts can make a real difference—small acts of kindness that remind kids that they're not alone, that someone cares, that someone has noticed, and that someone has seen and heard what is happening and wants to help. Actions like this could change a young person's life. Speaking up, showing kindness, including someone or asking if someone is doing okay are small acts that can create meaningful change. We know that bullying can have devastating consequences. The effects can be lifelong, damaging confidence forever and leading to irreversible and tragic outcomes. This is not acceptable.</para>
<para>The challenge with bullying is that it is sometimes hard to spot, but teachers, parents, sports coaches, volunteers and students who look for it can work together to create an environment where everyone belongs, diversity and difference is celebrated, and bullying is simply not accepted. So let's keep acting to create a shared understanding of bullying behaviours and encourage small acts that have a big impact.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We have a housing crisis in Australia. I know this because I see it in my own community in the Peel region in Western Australia. I have local people living out of their cars. They're parking down at the beach at night and using public showers in the morning because they don't have a home. This is the reality under Labor. Young Australians are working hard, saving their money and still can't get into a home. Those that do have a home are getting smashed by rising rents. They feel like the system is rigged. So what does Labor do in the middle of a housing shortage? They make it harder for people to invest in housing.</para>
<para>Labor told Australians their changes to negative gearing and the capital gains tax would add just $2 a week in rent. But people are facing increases up to 30 per cent. For someone paying $600 a week in rent, that's another $180 out of the family budget—more than $9,000 a year in additional rent. How is a working family supposed to find that money? Here's the reality under Labor: immigration numbers are out of control, not enough homes are being built, rents are skyrocketing and new housing taxes have smashed investor confidence. This is why Australia is facing a housing crisis—a housing crisis that this Labor government has caused. Labor has given us fewer homes and higher rents. Confidence has been smashed, and Australians are now sleeping in their cars. It's time we put Australians first.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tertiary Education and Training</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This year, in National Skills Week, we will celebrate that TAFE is life changing. Having been a student in my 20s and TAFE teacher, I understand that TAFE supports individuals to get the skills, expertise and confidence they need to pursue a career pathway. I am pleased to announce that the Minister for Skills and Training visited Dunkley recently and announced an investment of $10 million into the new VET Educator Academy. The academy will be based at Chisholm's Frankston campus and will drive the training of TAFE the teachers and educators we need to build the workforce that our economy depends on.</para>
<para>It was also a great opportunity to meet with apprentices and hear directly about their experiences and how the $10,000 Australian Apprenticeship Incentive Scheme is making a real difference. We met with Jackson, Anthony and Daniel from DP Heating and Cooling, who spoke about the $10,000 incentive that has helped them cover the costs of insurance, car registration and tools. There are nearly 20,000 apprentices currently training in and across Dunkley. They represent this government's investment in the future of our community and our economy. I am proud to see the Albanese Labor government's investment in skills, backing the next generation of workers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>These are important words in the Australian Defence Veterans' Covenant, which was passed in 2019:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For what they have done, this we will do.</para></quote>
<para>It's a solemn commitment. The one person in this place who should take that commitment more seriously than anyone else is the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. But we've seen this week that this minister is failing our veterans. He's failing to listen, he's failing to respond to their concerns and he's failing to show them the basic respect that they have earned. We know this minister refused to meet with a group of veterans because he didn't want to hear what they had to say about his cruel cap on allied health funding.</para>
<para>His decision to ration allied health services was not a recommendation of the royal commission. He made that one up himself. It's a cut to veterans' services without any consultation with our veterans, and this minister didn't want to listen to their complaints until he was shamed into that meeting. Then, according to an Air Force veteran Tim Nelson, he was rude to them because he was missing out on a function with the Governor-General. Tim Nelson said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">He walked into the room, refused to shake our hand, sat down with his arms crossed, and rolled his eyes.</para></quote>
<para>Minister, it's time to scrap this cruel cap and show some respect for our veterans.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Homelessness</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
    <electorate>Macnamara</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>What an honour it was this morning to go, with my friend the member for Bean and the Minister for Housing, down to Woden to the youth foyer. It is a youth housing place that gives 20 beds for young people who would otherwise be homeless, for them to turn their lives around. What a fantastic collaboration it was between different layers of government, working together to support young people.</para>
<para>We met incredible young KD, who went from foster homes and insecure housing finally into a place that had his back and allowed him to turn his life around and get the training and skills that he needs to support himself and build a better life. What we believe on this side of the House is that young people deserve support and opportunity in this country, and that is why we announced a further $300 million to support 13,000 young Australians who need that exact opportunity.</para>
<para>But, of course, not everyone holds this view. Not everyone thinks that we should be supporting young Australians in secure housing. In fact, the shadow minister for housing, when asked whether lower-income Australians should accept substandard housing, said, 'Yes—definitely.' Of course, he then had to get dragged into the Leader of the Opposition's office for a telling off. But, while those opposite are working out whether or not people should live in substandard housing, we are building housing so young Australians can build a future for themselves.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</title>
        <page.no>60</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This morning it was delightful to welcome Prime Minister Anutin of Thailand to Australia. It is his first visit here as prime minister, and it comes as our two nations approach the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations next year—three-quarters of a century in which we have built deep connections based on friendship and goodwill. As friends, partners and neighbours, we have worked across trade and investment, law enforcement, education, agriculture, innovation and energy. It is a relationship that we value deeply and one that continues to pay dividends for both of our peoples.</para>
<para>Today, Prime Minister Anutin and I discussed how we can make an even stronger contribution to a peaceful, stable and prosperous region. One way is through combating transnational crime, continuing and expanding the excellent cooperation between the Australian Federal Police and the Royal Thai Police. We agreed to elevate our defence relationship by committing to a biannual defence ministers meeting, and, in this time of global uncertainty, we agreed to coordinate closely to ensure supply chains remain open, secure and resilient. Thailand is Australia's fourth-largest trading partner in South-East Asia, and our investment links run into the billions of dollars on both sides. Enhancing the strength of our economic ties is a top priority for this government and part of our South-East Asia economic strategy to 2040, developed under the leadership of Nicholas Moore. There is much in the world right now that is uncertain, but our relationship with Thailand is certainly not. This is a relationship that goes back so many years.</para>
<para>My first visit to Thailand was a great privilege. It was made with former prisoners of war including 'Weary' Dunlop, 'Bluey' Rutherford, Tom Uren and others. I went to the opening of Hellfire Pass in Kanchanaburi and, indeed, took a trip down the River Kwai on a long boat with Sir John Carrick, whom I got to know. These amazing men, most of whom have passed now, had something in common apart from their solidarity, camaraderie with each other and extraordinary overcoming of hardship; it was their thanks for the Thai people who smuggled them in with a bit of food and water and cared for them. That is something that we should never forget about the Thai people—the debt that we owe them, forged at our darkest moment, which, in peacetime, continued to develop to the point where, today, we are very close friends indeed.</para>
<para>That relationship will continue through the meetings that will be held. The prime minister will attend the pre-COP in Fiji to talk about our common interests in the region in dealing with climate change, but we'll continue to engage right across the board on the full suite of measures. As two great democracies, we have much to give each other, and it is to our mutual benefit.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I associate the opposition with the fine words of the Prime Minister, and, on behalf of the coalition and the federal opposition, I also warmly welcome His Excellency the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand, his wife and the entire Thai delegation to our parliament. It was a great pleasure to meet with His Excellency earlier today, along with members of my team, the shadow ministers for foreign affairs and for defence and the shadow assistant minister for international development and the Indo-Pacific. The coalition is very pleased to see our two countries deepen their partnership and collaboration because of His Excellency's visit this week. Australia and Thailand elevated our bilateral relationship to a strategic partnership in 2020 under the former coalition government. We've had a free-trade agreement in place now for more than two decades that serves our countries and our peoples well, as has the economic cooperation agreement that was signed in Bangkok in 2022.</para>
<para>The coalition's thoughts are with all the Thai families who lost loved ones earlier this month in the school shooting on the outskirts of Bangkok. Australia has known similar mass shootings, of course, and I commend His Excellency for the leadership he has displayed in the wake of that tragedy. As His Excellency rightly acknowledged at the ASEAN Future Forum in June, much of the world is becoming more fragmented, more polarised and more uncertain. The coalition and federal opposition are deeply concerned about China's recent test launch of a nuclear-capable ballistic missile in the Pacific, and we welcome all nations of our region calling out and condemning acts of coercion or aggression, whatever the source. At a time of regional tension, I commend His Excellency for his determination to find a peaceful solution to Thailand and Cambodia's border disputes. We hope this current ceasefire can turn into a lasting peace.</para>
<para>It's been eight years since Australian and Thai heroes rescued a boys soccer team who had become trapped in a cave in northern Thailand. That evacuation was extraordinary and a defining moment of friendship between our two great countries. Today, we salute those heroes and acknowledge our abiding friendship. His Excellency and the Thai delegation are most welcome guests in our country.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>61</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing. On Monday, the minister said she was 'damn proud' of Labor's broken promises on capital tax gains and negative gearing. Today, Australia's biggest rental property manager, Ray White, said rents could surge by 30 per cent as a result of Labor's toxic taxes. Is the minister 'damn proud' of making millions of Australians pay higher rents?</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Interjecting for someone to sit down is highly disorderly, Member for Chisholm and the members in that section.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I apologise if it was not the member for Chisholm, but someone there did it, and I'm not happy about it. If I see anyone behaving like that, they will not be here to hear any questions or answers.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I really appreciate this question from the member opposite. I think I've said to the parliament before that we should try to speak the truth in this chamber whenever we can. I'm really worried for the honourable member opposite who's asked me this question about the sheer number of mistruths that she was able to pack into one question. Let's just go through them one by one. The first is that she has knowingly misquoted me in her question, but the second is that she has reached for Ray White. I want to read to the parliament what Ray White have said today:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Ray White is not forecasting a 30 per cent rise in rents.</para></quote>
<para>How incredibly embarrassing for the opposition, because this is actually the second day in a row that they have come into this parliament and misquoted a party saying this. I just want to remind the parliament that, when they came into the parliament yesterday, they accused the National Australia Bank of saying the same thing, and then the National Australia Bank clarified:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This was not a forecast and it is important to note that we do not forecast rental yields.</para></quote>
<para>Seriously, you just could not make this stuff up.</para>
<para>I just want to go back to basics and actually talk to the parliament about what's really going on here, not the fictional world that's been created by those opposite. We've got really serious housing problems facing our country. Unlike those opposite, our political party didn't discover the existence of Australian renters yesterday. We have decades of advocacy for this third of our population which is really bearing the brunt of what has gone wrong for housing in our country. Twenty-five years of Australian governments—and let's be honest—of every political colour have not done enough about this problem. That is changing under our government. We have a massive and comprehensive policy that we are putting in place to support renters, to build more homes, to help with Commonwealth rent assistance, to improve rental standards and, perhaps most importantly of all, to give what most Australian renters tell us they want most of all, and that is a realistic pathway into homeownership.</para>
<para>Let's not pretend that this is about renters. I have been in this parliament for 12 years now. I have never for a single day heard those opposite come forward and actually advocate for renters. What they are doing is using renters as a cover for a political campaign to defend a broken system of which renters are the main victims. On this side of the chamber, we've got real reforms to help renters around this country, and we'll keep advocating for them as we have for decades.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Corangamite is warned. We're not having random people just saying what they feel like. Honestly! The House will come to order immediately.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government progressing real reform and delivering real change? Why is this agenda so important to Australians, and what are the threats to this work?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Robertson for his question and for his outstanding work looking after the people of the Central Coast. As a government, we are taking action in so many areas where reform has been put off for too long or progress has been too slow. We're putting in the hard work so that we can deliver real change for Australians, just like the housing minister indicated in that area. We're taking action because it's the right thing to do both now and for the future.</para>
<para>Last night, our reforms to safeguard and strengthen the NDIS passed the Senate. The NDIS is a cherished institution and, over 15 years, it has truly proved itself to be one of Australia's great modern reforms, a reform that the Australian Labor Party is so proud of. That is why we took action to make sure the NDIS is sustainable and here to stay, providing the security, dignity and support that Australians need and deserve well into the future.</para>
<para>Yesterday our reforms tackling gambling harm passed through this House. Problem gambling is a very real issue, and the connection between gambling and sport is an issue as well. Doing something about it requires a national effort. That is why we took action, legislating the strongest reforms to tackle gambling harm of any government ever and striking a balance so that Australians can still have a punt if appropriate and if they wish on a Saturday afternoon.</para>
<para>Today the House has passed our reforms protecting Australian journalism now and into the future. The way that Australians consume news has changed, but the important contribution that the media sector makes to our Australian democracy has not. That is why we have taken action, putting in place reforms that encourage these tech giants to do deals with media companies. But, if they don't, they will make a payment that will directly assist in the employment of journalists. This is good reform, making sure that, in the future, we continue to have news media organisations.</para>
<para>Now, none of these are easy reforms. They require listening. They require hard work. They require action. But that is what delivering real change requires, and delivering real change is what our government is determined to achieve right across the board.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister for Defence Personnel. The Australian Defence Veterans' Covenant Oath says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We undertake to preserve the memory and deeds of all who have served and promise to welcome, embrace and support all military veterans as respected and valued members of our community.</para></quote>
<para>This week, veterans and their advocates say the minister meant to represent them has, in their words, 'treated them with contempt'. Is the minister confident veterans would agree he is upholding the covenant oath?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question, and I thank him for referencing that legislation. That was legislation that was passed by this parliament with the support of all sides, as you would absolutely expect, because not only are we are honoured by the presence of those people that have served in our defence force in our parliament, and we thank them for their service, but it is the responsibility of our nation, of our parliament and of any government to make sure that we look after our veterans. I don't think anybody would disagree with that proposition or with what's in that legislation and is set out as our obligation.</para>
<para>As I said at this dispatch box very early on becoming minister, there had clearly been failings in providing the necessary support, services, compensation payments and right treatment in service and for those people who had served—not just by one government; by many governments—but we all had to work together to make that system work better. It's why there was the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide, and it's why we have worked so hard to make sure that we are working to implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide, amongst other changes and improvements in the system of support for our veteran community.</para>
<para>But we are making the lives of our serving men and women better as well. As we do that, it's clear from the failures of the past that there's always room for improvement. That's why we've also made sure that we've been working together with the veteran community and have always said, in implementing change, that we work with the veteran community to get those changes to work right for them.</para>
<para>I know, as I'm sure every former minister for veterans' affairs in this place knows, that there has been, built up over time, a lack of trust in the Department of Veterans' Affairs, and we know why. We want to remedy that and we want to change that. That's why we've made the investments in the department that we've made. We continue to work to make it better for everybody, and I think we have been making it better. Is there more work to do there? There absolutely and always will be, and that's what we will keep doing. I hope that every government in the future will always keep working to make those systems better.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Riverina on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCormack</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to table this sacred document, the Australian Defence Veterans' Covenant, so the minister can refamiliarise himself with the words therein.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing and Minister for Disability and the NDIS. How is the Albanese Labor government securing the future of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and working with states and territories to deliver support for Australians living with disability?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the member for McEwen for that really important question. Last night, as he knows, the Senate passed the government's plan to get the NDIS back on track. This is really important, essential reform. It had become increasingly clear, I think, to the broader Australian community that this extraordinary social program, which has delivered so much to Australians living with disability, had nonetheless grown too big, was costing far too much and had become a soft target for crooks and for shonks. The changes that were passed last night deal with all of those problems and set the clearest possible path, I think, for a sustainable, secure future for the world's best disability insurance scheme.</para>
<para>While these reforms are essential, I know that they are, as the Prime Minister indicated, hard reforms. I know that they are causing anxiety in some parts of the community among some NDIS participants and their loved ones. I want to assure those Australians in the broader community of a few things: this program will still grow; this will still be our biggest social program outside of the aged pension, significantly bigger than Medicare and way bigger than the PBS; and it will remain the centrepiece of the most comprehensive suite of supports for people with disability that you will find anywhere on the planet.</para>
<para>But, even with the passage of those changes last night in the other place, there is still much to do. New eligibility tests are being developed right now to return the scheme to its original purpose, which was, as I think we all know, to support people with significant and permanent disability. That makes our work with state governments even more critically important—to rebuild those other support systems that used to exist at state level to provide that critical support to people with more low to moderate support needs. Every state and territory, except Queensland, has now finalised their implementation plans for the Thriving Kids program supporting children under the age of nine. Those supports will start rolling out in only a few weeks time, and they'll be fully up and running by the end of next year, ready for the new eligibility changes that take place on 1 January 2028.</para>
<para>I have to say that Queensland needs to get moving in this area as well. Queensland families deserve the same commitment and the same action that we're seeing from every other state government, Labor and Liberal alike. Then we need to get on with the other critical work to develop supports for other groups: children over the age of nine, people with psychosocial disability and many others. I thank the parliament for their support for this critical plan. We now need to get on with implementing it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>63</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Acknowledgement</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today is a delegation of homelessness and mental health sector representatives from across Australia who are visiting parliament today to discuss how to tackle repeated homelessness as guests of the Minister for Housing and the member for Menzies. I'm also pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today is a guest of the member for Wentworth, Ms Chanel Contos, the founder and CEO of Teach Us Consent, a youth led not-for-profit organisation focused on implementing consent education in our schools. Also I'm pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today is Dr Nicholas Pappas AM, chair of the Special Broadcasting Service, and Ms Jane Palfreyman, the managing director. They are here today for a bipartisan event with SBS, which demonstrates strong support from across the parliament, particularly reflecting social cohesion and contributing to our civics education. For the Prime Minister's benefit, I understand that Dr Pappas is also the chair of the Sydney Rabbitohs.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>63</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7414" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Communications. Your universal outdoor mobile obligation bill has strong support and could pass this week, but it's been sitting on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline> for over a year. I've put forward several amendments, including vital reforms to help facilitate temporary disaster roaming. Recent mobile outages have shown that a hands-off approach to telecommunications isn't enough. Minister, why is the government going slowmo on UOMO?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Indi for her question. The universal outdoor mobile obligation will enable, for the very first time, baseline outdoor mobile connectivity across Australia. It will substantially expand scope for people to seek help if they're lost, if they're injured or if they're facing natural disasters in areas without traditional terrestrial mobile coverage. I know this is a really important issue for the member, and I thank her for her ongoing engagement in the UOMO bill to date. I think it's fair to say that the electorate of Indi is a real example of the kinds of communities that UOMOs will assist. I was pleased to meet with the member for Indi earlier to hear her concerns on behalf of her constituents.</para>
<para>Why hasn't it passed the House yet? As the member is aware, the Albanese Labor government has progressed several key pieces of legislation in the last two weeks. I look forward to UOMO coming back for consideration in detail soon. I thank the member for her constructive proposed amendments. I will respond to them in full when we do consideration in detail. I would remind her that the default start date for UOMO is 1 December 2027. The No. 1 factor in whether any obligation can commence on that date is the development of the direct-to-device market. That's the No. 1 factor. That's why we'll continue to assess industry readiness.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Communications. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering real change that is creating a sustainable and responsible future for Australians when it comes to gambling reform and Australia's media landscape?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Moreton for her question, and I hope that her knee is on the mend. The Albanese government is delivering real and meaningful reform to help Australians through tax cuts, paid parental leave, help for first home buyers and action to keep kids safe online. But these are not the only ways we are delivering for Australians.</para>
<para>People across the country rely on journalists and public interest media to be informed about issues that matter to them. The Albanese government is delivering direct support for the media through our $153 million investment in the News Media Assistance Program. The member for Moreton introduced me to Emily at the <inline font-style="italic">Queensland Chinese Times</inline> in Sunnybank to talk about the funding they have received through the Albanese government's Journalism Assistance Fund. This is a small newspaper, but it is an important part of the local community, helping people stay informed about what is happening and what's important to them. Publications like this ensure local voices are heard and that local stories are told.</para>
<para>The media matters, and journalism matters. Journalism is the lifeblood of a robust democracy. It holds people, businesses and governments to account, which is why the Albanese government is backing a strong and sustainable media sector. There's never been a more critical time to ensure the sustainability of Australia's media sector. That's why we're progressing the News Bargaining Incentive legislation through parliament this week with coalition support—keep up; there are two bills. We believe it is only fair that large digital platforms contribute to the hard work of journalists and the stories that enrich their feeds and drive their revenue. They should pay their fair share, and that's what the News Bargaining Incentive will ensure they do. If digital platforms do not do deals with news publishers, they will need to pay a charge, and any revenue raised will be distributed to the news media sector to support journalism in Australia.</para>
<para>In the last two days in this parliament, we have delivered significant reforms which will build a sustainable, responsible future for Australians. This includes the intractably difficult job of reforming the NDIS and taking the strongest ever action to tackle the harms of gambling.</para>
<para>In households today we no longer gather around one TV to watch our teams or our favourite shows, and our gambling advertising reforms acknowledge this. That is why amendments introduced yesterday go further to protect children from seeing gambling ads, be that via streaming or on TV. We are protecting children and supporting people at risk while making reform workable and keeping industry accountable for their practices. Our gambling advertising reforms are focused where Australians need protection most while ensuring the new rules are practical, enforceable and capable of delivering real change.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister for Defence Personnel. This morning, Renee Wilson, the CEO of the Families of Veterans Guild and partner of combat wounded Gary Wilson, told the media that the first she heard of the minister's discussion paper about his cruel cap was in question time yesterday. Why on earth hasn't the minister picked up the phone to the CEO of the organisation representing Australia's war widows?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question, and I recognise his real dedication to these issues, of course from his own service and the great work he does, particularly in his community of Townsville, which is a key garrison city for our country.</para>
<para>I have had engagements with Renee, as you mentioned. She does great work through her guild and the work that she does to support our veteran families. I've had many engagements with her. We've been clear, when we announced the changes to allied health to improve access, that we would also be consulting with the veteran community around how we would ensure that there's no gap in service provision to our veteran community as a result of these changes. We've been very clear about that, and we'll be starting that soon. As I mentioned in question time yesterday that will involve a discussion paper. I haven't had a direct conversation with her about the discussion paper, but we really look forward to seeing all of that feedback come in as part of that process, including from Renee and her organisation and the many other ex-service organisations around the country.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Acknowledgement</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to draw the House's attention to an important and historic delegation that has joined us on the floor of parliament. For the first time in our parliament's history I get to welcome the Lord Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Tonga. To His Excellency Lord Vaea and his parliamentary delegation, malo e lava mai. Welcome to question time.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
    <electorate>Macnamara</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering for Australian workers, and what could put this progress at risk?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to thank the member for Macnamara for his question and for his fierce advocacy for workers in his electorate but also right around the country. The Albanese Labor government is helping to deliver higher wages for workers because we know this is one of the best ways to help with cost-of-living pressures. We have delivered world-leading minimum standards to ensure gig workers do not have to rely on tips to make ends meet. With the first minimum standard coming into force this week, some platform delivery drivers are now earning 25 per cent more.</para>
<para>It's this Labor government that has also backed wage rises for our lowest paid workers each and every year that we've been in government. This Labor government has reinvigorated enterprise bargaining, which is delivering higher wages for more workers. Just last week, the Minister for Education introduced legislation to lock in a 15 per cent pay increase for our early educators. This government closed the labour liar loophole, which meant that many people doing the same job—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Okay, I'll do it again: the labour hire loophole. You know where I'm going. You don't want to get there.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Members on my left will cease interjecting immediately.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>This government is getting wages moving.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And getting wages moving is critical to this government's mandate. The ABS data released today shows that annual nominal wages have grown above three per cent under this Labor government for the last four years, and this data also shows that real wages have grown in the June quarter.</para>
<para>I know this is the bit they don't want me to get to because I am asked what could put this progress at risk. Of course we all know what will put this progress at risk. It would be the Liberals, the Nationals and One Nation, if they were to ever form government. Not only did those opposite, when they were in government, have low wages as a key design feature of their economic policy but they failed to back pay rises for our low-paid workers.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As I reported yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition described our laws that have led to pay rises as being disastrous. That is his attitude to wage increases. Of course he is in good company with One Nation, who have consistently voted with the Liberals and the Nationals to stop laws that will actually deliver pay increases to workers in this country. It is very clear that if the Liberals, the Nationals and One Nation were to ever form government workers, wages would be on the chopping block. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There was far too much noise during that answer. The member for Hunter interjected 11 times during that answer. He'll leave the chamber under the provisions of standing order 94(a). He simply can't continuously interject on people. I made that clear yesterday. It goes to both sides of the chamber.</para>
<para> <inline font-style="italic">The member for </inline> <inline font-style="italic">Hunter</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Now that the House has come to order, we'll hear from the honourable member for Riverina.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel. Veterans and their families have lost faith in the minister. Former Royal Australian Navy diver and Fair Care for Veterans spokesman John Armfield said, after the meeting with the minister, 'I enlisted under the Navy values of courage, honour, honesty and loyalty.' You failed to display any of these values, Minister. How can the minister continue as Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel if he cannot uphold Defence values?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. The circumstances of Mr Armfield that he has gone through—he gave evidence to the royal commission about that, and I saw that evidence and have engaged with him about the circumstances he had to confront—were tragic and terrible. I've said that to him before. Navy apologised to him for some of that conduct as well, and they very much should have done so. I can very much understand why he would feel that there has been a breach of faith with him in terms of the upholding of the Australian Defence Force values in his engagement. I understand that. I am sorry that he holds that view about me, and all I can do—as I try to do each and every day—is make sure that we're continuing the work of improving the system that exists to support our serving personnel, our veteran community and their families so that they get the service and the support that we all agree that they deserve.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WITTY</name>
    <name.id>316660</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. What progress has the Albanese Labor government made on wages, super and the budget, and what are the risks to this progress?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations told us a moment ago, we have seen real wages growth in the June quarter and we have seen nominal wages growth higher than three per cent for all four years of this Labor government. I know that the member for Melbourne, as a real champion of the working people of that wonderful city, is very pleased to see this government delivering nominal wages higher than three per cent all throughout our government—never once achieved by those opposite in the previous government.</para>
<para>When we came to office, real wages were falling sharply. They've risen in eight of the last 11 quarters in annual terms. They went up today in the June quarter, but we acknowledge that this persistent inflation challenge in our economy puts pressure on real wages. We've acknowledged that in a number of different ways. This government has overseen higher nominal wages growth than we saw under those opposite. We're doing that. Whether it's advancing workers during their working years or making sure that they've got a decent superannuation system when they retire, this government backs workers while those opposite attack them. We back them with stronger wages, and we back them with the strongest superannuation system—getting super to 12 per cent, payday super, super on paid parental leave and making sure that we strengthen this system, which is the envy of the world, to deliver economic security and retirement incomes for millions of Australian workers.</para>
<para>We're boosting wages. We're strengthening super. We're helping with the cost of living. At the same time, we're strengthening the budget. We saw that recognised overnight when Moody's, the second biggest global ratings agency, in the course of the last couple of weeks reaffirmed Australia's AAA credit rating. They did that because of the responsible way that we have gone about managing the budget, getting gross debt down $200 billion lower than what we inherited and the trajectory that those opposite left us when we came to office. I encourage the House to look at that Moody's statement overnight. It was effusive about the government's responsible economic management, another welcome and powerful endorsement of this government's responsible economic management.</para>
<para>Whether it comes to wages, superannuation or managing the budget responsibly, the contrast couldn't be clearer. Those opposite have already racked up another $110 billion in commitments in the forward estimates alone, more than half a trillion over the next decade or so. The shadow Treasurer says that he'll offset all that, but he won't tell us what that means for Medicare, wages or super. At the next election, the difference will be really clear: a Labor government and this Prime Minister backing workers, wages and super and strengthening the budget and those opposite—the Liberals, the Nationals and One Nation—who hate superannuation because they don't support working people.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel. Former Air Force fighter jet pilot Dr Tim Nelson spoke about the minister's behaviour in a meeting. I quote, 'He walked into the room, refused to shake our hand, sat down with his arms crossed and rolled his eyes.' Yesterday the minister told the House:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I don't agree with the characterisation that you've just outlined.</para></quote>
<para>Is the minister calling this veteran a liar?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. I meet with many veterans, veteran family members and Defence personnel on a regular basis, and I respect every position that they put to me in what they say and describe. But I also am not in the habit of repeating the content and detail of all of those conversations and meetings in the parliament every day, and I provided the answer that I provided yesterday.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Roads</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. How is the Albanese Labor government working with the New South Wales government to deliver for the community and improve the Mitchell's Causeway on the Great Western Highway?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Macquarie for her question but also for her incredible advocacy for her electorate, particularly for the people of the Blue Mountains, who have been affected by the closure of Victoria Pass since March. I also acknowledge the advocacy of the member for Calare, who's not in the chamber at the moment, for the thank-you note that he just sent me during question time.</para>
<para>I told the House we would have an update to provide very, very soon, and I'm very pleased that we can now share that update. Today I joined the member for Macquarie in Mount Victoria to announce that the Albanese government is partnering with the Minns government and will fully fund and deliver the reconstruction of the Mitchell's Causeway. Our $100 million commitment, matched by the New South Wales government, will now build a new stable and secure bridge deck that will sit above the 194-year-old Convict Bridge, affectionately known as the Mitchell's Causeway. Effectively, we're building a bridge above the old bridge.</para>
<para>Today we also announced that we won't just restore the two lanes on the Mitchell's Causeway; the new bridge will be better than it was before, with an additional eastbound passing lane. We've not let a minute go to waste. Work on restoring the causeway and the original two lanes is already underway, and we'll start work on the additional lanes soon. This was very welcome news for anyone heading up into the mountains from the Central West, and this new passing lane will give cars the freedom to safely navigate around slow-moving trucks and make the climb easier for truck drivers as well.</para>
<para>It's been incredibly tough for residents on both sides of Victoria Pass since March, with serious defects identified, forcing its closure. From day one, we have been working very closely with the New South Wales government. We've been very clear from the start that our government would support them in funding and the delivery to fix this project. The New South Wales government, led by Minister Aitchison, moved very quickly to assess the bridge, develop a plan to fix it and get it reopened next year. And, because of that focused priority work, we believe we will have the new road deck in place and the highway opened and reconnected by mid-2027.</para>
<para>This $200 million commitment is a joint commitment of both state and federal levels of government, to see the causeway not only rebuilt but built back better. This is how you work collaboratively with state governments. We were very pleased to join with them in that announcement this morning, and I want to give a shout-out to the workforce there. They have been on site since day one to get the geotech work and all of that done, and it's a great example of what communities can do together. Again, I thank very much the communities around Victoria Pass for their patience. But also, you have some very strong advocates in this place, particularly the member for Macquarie, for her great work in making sure we're aware of what is happening for this project.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>67</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Queensland Parliament: Parliamentary Delegation</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to inform the House that we've been joined by a delegation from the Queensland parliament, including Corrine McMillan MP, Michael Healy MP, Nikki Boyd MP and the Hon. Glenn Butcher MP. I also note in the gallery his father, Frank Brennan SJ AO. Welcome to question time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>67</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the Treasurer. Australian real wages have fallen by five per cent since March 2021. The only sustainable antidote is productivity growth, and business and economists agree that deregulation is central to that. I welcome budget measures to address regulatory constraints, but we need more, and the budget didn't curb what the PC calls Australia's 'red tape impulse'. Will the government act to reset incentives around regulation with something like a regulatory review committee with similar importance to the ERC, hard targets to departments to offset new regulations with deregulation, or a minister for better regulation?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the honourable member for her interest in this important topic. On the last part of her question, Katy Gallagher is the minister for better regulation, and I'm proud to support her work. In fact, the whole cabinet is engaged in one way or another in this important task of economic reform, particularly when it comes to better regulation. As part of that I also give a shout-out to the Assistant Treasurer and the Assistant Minister to the Treasury for the work they do. The Assistant Treasurer gave a wonderful speech today at the National Press Club about some important issues.</para>
<para>I thank the honourable member for her question for a number of reasons, but partly because I acknowledge the important contribution she made to the Economic Reform Roundtable, which began a year ago today; today is its one-year anniversary. That roundtable brought together a whole bunch of people to shape the economic future of this country. This government has delivered more economic reform in the years since that roundtable than was delivered in the quarter of a century that preceded it. That reform was really important because it helped shape an ambitious tax reform agenda, the broadest productivity agenda and the most net savings in a budget in a generation. Better regulation was important to all three of those objectives.</para>
<para>When it comes to targets, the budget made it clear that our objective here, our expectation here, is that the combination of our efforts on regulation will cut compliance costs in our economy by more than $10 billion a year, and almost a tenth of that is in the financial sector alone. So, whether it's the omnibus bill that we passed on regulatory reform, whether it's the way we've changed the statement of expectations for our regulators, whether it's the Better Regulation Roadmap through the Council of Financial Regulators, whether it's the steps we're taking with the states on national competition policy—and I acknowledge that it's Assistant Minister Leigh in that regard—whether it's abolishing nuisance tariffs, whether it's speeding up approvals, whether it's fast-tracking housing approvals in particular, and I acknowledge the housing minister and the environment minister, or whether it's streamlining the construction code, there are a whole bunch of steps the government is taking to meet the kinds of objectives the honourable member has asked me about.</para>
<para>The honourable member also asked me whether there's more work to do. Of course there is. When it comes to better regulation, there's not a destination here; it requires ongoing work. But in the years since the Economic Reform Roundtable we've shown a willingness right across the cabinet, right across the government, to cut compliance costs where we can, to make sure regulation is serving a useful purpose, because we acknowledge, as the honourable member does, just how important this is to turning around a couple of decades of poor productivity performance in our economy.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering real outcomes for Australians with superannuation and improving the security, stability and integrity of the Australian superannuation system? Are there any threats?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Werriwa for her question, and I acknowledge that she has been a champion of the super system throughout her time in this place. She's advocated for lifting the SG rate for payday super and for closing the gender gap. The collapse of Shield and First Guardian was devastating for thousands of Australians who lost retirement savings that they had spent decades building. These were not reckless investors taking speculative bets. In many cases they were ordinary Australians who believed they were making sensible decisions about their retirement but instead found themselves exposed to serious misconduct, poor governance and harmful sales practices.</para>
<para>Earlier today, this government announced a comprehensive package of reforms to strengthen the security, stability and integrity of our superannuation system and to better protect the promise of a dignified retirement for future generations. We announced a major crackdown on harmful lead-generation practices, Shield and First Guardian exposed an ecosystem where consumers could click on an online advertisement, have their data harvested and sold, receive a call from an unlicensed lead generator and then be funnelled towards risky investment products. We are banning unlicensed real-time communications about superannuation. We are tightening anti-hawking laws. We are strengthening penalties and we are targeting the data harvesting and broking practices that sit at the front end of these harmful business models. The objective is simple: stop consumer harm before it occurs and shut down the pathways that bad actors use to gain access to Australians' retirement savings.</para>
<para>The second pillar that I announced today is stronger accountability and compensation arrangements across superannuation platforms. Australians should be able to trust that, if a trustee places a product in front of members, that trustee stands behind it. That's why we're creating a new framework that enables ASIC to direct trustees to commence remediation processes where there are credible concerns that they have failed in their obligations. Where trustee failures have contributed to losses, members should have access to clear and practical pathways to compensation.</para>
<para>We are also giving APRA powers to ensure trustees offering higher risk products have the financial capability to meet those responsibilities and that they have the backing to stand behind their obligations. These reforms will provide compensation closer to the source of failure.</para>
<para>The third pillar is improving access to safe, affordable and reliable financial advice. As our superannuation system matures, Australians increasingly need help navigating complex retirement decisions. We're progressing long-awaited financial advice reforms. Taken together, these reforms address the lessons of Shield and First Guardian, strengthen consumer protections right across the system, improve accountability and expand access to advice. They put superannuation members first and help ensure Australians can have confidence in their retirement systems. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Veterans' Affairs</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Prime Minister, yesterday the Minister for Veterans' Affairs admitted he got it wrong in refusing to meet with veterans to discuss Labor's cruel cap on allied health services. He also got it wrong in trying to put a use by date on medallic recognition. He got it wrong in refusing to support the Invictus Games and he got it wrong in cutting funding for the family of fallen Victoria Cross hero Cameron Baird VC MG. Why won't the Prime Minister sack this incompetent and disrespectful minister?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Corangamite will leave the chamber under 94(a). She's on a warning. It's highly disorderly to interject on anyone, particularly the Leader of the Opposition during his question. The rules apply to everyone in this place. The Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have every confidence in the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. Indeed, I consider it to be one of the great privileges of my time in this place that I, as Prime Minister but previously as well, get to engage with those men and women who wear our uniform, who serve in our name and who deserve our total respect at all times for what they do. Our veterans stepped up for us, and we must step up for them. I spoke earlier today about my first experience overseas, back in 1986 with those extraordinary veterans led by Weary Dunlop. Since then, every single conflict has seen Australia's men and women serve with honour, with dignity, and they deserve our respect.</para>
<para>Now, the minister inherited a system where the former minister for veterans' affairs, the member for Calare—you will recall the actions that he had to take.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Minister for Infrastructure is warned. The Prime Minister has concluded his answer.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FRANCE</name>
    <name.id>270198</name.id>
    <electorate>Dickson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing. How are the Albanese Labor government's housing tax reforms helping Australians? What approaches would make it more difficult for Australians to get a roof over their heads?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Dickson for this question. Not only is this woman a remarkable Australian but she is one of the strongest voices in this parliament for housing policy, and I want to thank her for her leadership.</para>
<para>Our housing tax reforms have two really clear goals. The first is to give first home buyers a better shot at getting the keys to their own home, and we want to encourage more investment in building the homes Australia needs.</para>
<para>It's early days since the budget, but we are seeing some really encouraging signs in what is coming out of the sector. The latest ABS data shows that lending to investors buying new dwellings is up more than 27 per cent on last year. What remarkable growth. At the same time, we are seeing investor lending for construction rise 4.4 per cent. It is now 20 per cent higher than it was a year ago.</para>
<para>That same data shows us that investor lending to buy existing homes fell almost 15 per cent in the June quarter, and data from our five per cent deposit program shows us that we have got first home buyers around this country going to auctions, and they are winning.</para>
<para>These are the exact directions that we want to see from the housing market. We want to see less investor money chasing up the house prices of homes that we already have. We want to see more investment helping build the homes our country needs, and we want to see those scales tipped right back in favour of first home buyers.</para>
<para>We are seeing support for these measures from some, frankly, quite surprising quarters. I want to share with you a quote from Commonwealth Bank CEO, Matt Comyn, who has said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Investing or supporting businesses so they can invest, grow and employ people is going to deliver a better overall outcome for the country than buying and selling housing to each other.</para></quote>
<para>We had the National Australia Bank's chief economist, Sally Auld, say, on <inline font-style="italic">7.30</inline>:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… over the long run, it's … owner-occupiers who are the winners in all of this, in the sense that we're going to redistribute … the ownership of housing away from investors and more towards owner-occupiers.</para></quote>
<para>We have even got leaders in our banking sector who can see that these changes are in the national interest. Why can't the coalition and One Nation see the same?</para>
<para>When we look at the facts, we have got home ownership rates for young people around this country falling through the floor; 81 per cent of millennials and gen Z tell us that they are delaying major life decisions—delaying getting married and delaying having a child—because they are concerned about housing insecurity. Yet still, those opposite spend their time in this parliament defending a broken housing system.</para>
<para>Well, I say, very directly to Australians: we hear you, we see the pain that you are in, and we will keep delivering you the real change you need to get into a home of your own.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing. It's reported that approximately 51,000 non-citizens, one-fifth of the overall applicants, have accessed the five per cent first home buyers deposit scheme, many of whom may own overseas properties. Rightly, the government does not allow HECS debt to be accrued by permanent residents, as they're not Australian citizens, so why does the government expose Australian citizens to the risk of loan default from non-Australians accessing the five per cent deposit scheme?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. We've been through this before in the parliament. There is tightly controlled eligibility for this scheme. Temporary residents are not eligible for the scheme, despite what's been inferred and said by the Leader of the Opposition.</para>
<para>The only people who are eligible for this scheme are citizens of our country and permanent residents. Permanent residents are very likely to have lived in our country for a long time. The hint is in the word 'permanent'. These are people who are working as doctors and nurses. They are aged-care workers who are caring for our elderly. They are carers who are working in the disability and other sectors. They are permanent residents across our country, and they are helping our country grow.</para>
<para>Now, I'm hearing a lot of interjection from the Leader of the Opposition. I want to remind him again that the words that he utters in this parliament are not just heard by the people he thinks—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm responding to an interjection, Speaker.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I can handle it, Minister, thank you. The manager is entitled to raise his point of order, so I'll hear his point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Out of respect for the member who asked this question, it didn't have anything to do with the opposition, and I think the minister should be brought back to the question itself.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm just reading the question. There was no analysis of opposition policy, so I'm just going to get the minister to come back to the five per cent deposit scheme, but I'm going to make sure that, if she is doing any policy relating to the topic or any comparing and contrasting, she's relevant to the question she was asked. The Leader of the House?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Just in terms of the compare and contrast issue, there's a series of different points throughout that question. I'm just looking at it now. It's not even limited to one policy area; it contains other comparisons. So the capacity to be able to compare and contrast is broader in that than it would otherwise—</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">An opposition member interjecting</inline>—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Take the call if you want to chat.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Okay, we'll get through this. The Manager of Opposition Business?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister was referencing specifically the Leader of the Opposition. Now, there was nothing in there about the Leader of the Opposition, in that—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We'll be able to sort this out. I'll hear from the Prime Minister.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Mr Speaker. The minister was referring to the policy issue which related directly to the question that was asked. The question that was asked went to eligibility for the five per cent deposits. It is perfectly relevant for the minister—and, indeed, in order to give an answer to that question, it is necessary for the minister—to point out who is eligible for this scheme. And the fact is—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The manager was heard in silence. I gave the courtesy to the manager. I'll ask the same courtesy be applied to the Prime Minister.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The fact is that that is why the minister needs to go through the way the scheme operates and why the explanation of its eligibility is critical.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! It will help with things if the Leader of the Opposition ceases interjecting so the minister doesn't respond to interjections as well. Everyone is correct in this argument. I want to make sure, as I said, that if there's compare and contrast, it's related to this policy. That's my point and that's my ruling.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In regard to the compare and contrast in relation to this policy, I want the parliament to know that, actually, since we last met, the Leader of the Opposition was busted making a false claim about the eligibility of this policy, and I want to quote to you what he said. He said: 'Labor has made the five per cent deposit program available to anyone the day they arrive.'</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will just pause for a second. Just take your seat for a moment. I am not happy with the level of interjections during this question time today. There is far, far too much ongoing interjection—the member for Lyne is continuously interjecting; I'll have to put you on a warning, Member for Lyne—and that goes for both sides. I don't like issuing a general warning, but I'm getting close to doing it for everyone inside this House today. Please, I am asking everyone to listen to the minister, to show respect, and to show respect for the person asking the question as well. It's not good enough, and I'm asking everyone now to do better.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I was just reporting to the parliament that, in the sitting break, the Leader of the Opposition was busted saying behind closed doors: 'Labor has made the five per cent deposit program available to anyone the day they arrive in the country.' I want to call that out because it just speaks to the disgraceful reflex for division that those opposite bring forward to all of the problems facing our country. It wasn't just that. The Leader of the Opposition actually said publicly when he announced that he wanted to withdraw support for permanent residents, 'when you commit to this country we'll commit to you'. And I want our loved Chinese Australian community and I want our loved Indian Australian community to know that we see your commitment to our country. We respect it, and we value it.</para>
<para>This is a program our government is incredibly proud of. 260,000 people have the keys to their own home today because of this fantastic support that we are offering them. Not only are those opposite focused on division, but they do not have a single sensible thing to say about housing, the most important issue facing our country. We're not going to be distracted by their obsession with conflict. We've got housing issues facing our country, and that's why we're stepping up and making real change to Australia's housing system.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Small Business</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Small Business. How is the Albanese Labor government supporting Australian small businesses to have certainty to invest in their business?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALY</name>
    <name.id>13050</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can I thank the member for Dunkley not just for her question but for the tireless way that she comes here every single day and advocates for the small businesses in her electorate of Dunkley.</para>
<para>There are 2.7 million small businesses across Australia, and behind this figure are millions of Australians, mums and dads, migrants, people young and old, people with a passion and a talent. But starting a small business is more than just monetising a passion or a talent or a skill. It's about contributing to our economy and, importantly, also contributing to our community. When people take that plunge and they decide to start a business, they need confidence and they need certainty to be able to make the long-term decisions for growth and sustainability for their business.</para>
<para>That's why we announced in this year's budget that we would make the $20,000 instant asset write-off permanent. I'm very happy to update the house that, as of this morning, the Albanese Labor government has delivered on that commitment, and the $20,000 instant asset write-off is now a permanent feature of our economy. What this means is that small businesses who want to invest in equipment, in machinery, in tools or in assets can do so with confidence. They can plan ahead. They can plan ahead without having to constantly worry about whether or not the instant asset write-off will be held for another year, as they have had to do in the past.</para>
<para>Small businesses are already taking advantage of the instant asset write-off in fairly significant numbers. In fact, the latest figures show that around 300,000 businesses claimed the instant asset write-off in the 2024-25 financial year. Now importantly, this measure applies on a per asset basis, so businesses can write off multiple purchases during the year, and it can also be used multiple times during the financial year. Whether it's one coffee machine or three, one new fridge or an entire fit-out, small businesses can write off the assets that they need when they need and as many times as they need.</para>
<para>This is just one of the ways that this Albanese Labor government is supporting small business. It's just one of the ways that we're making a difference, a real difference, to small businesses. It's one of the ways that we back small businesses because we know that small businesses back Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</title>
        <page.no>72</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wright, Mr Tony</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to speak for a moment about a true treasure of the press gallery, Tony Wright, who's with us in the gallery up there. It is appropriate that we acknowledge his presence on a day on which the House of Representatives has acknowledged the importance of journalism by adopting the News Bargaining Incentive. After 50 years in journalism, Tony is calling it a day. Respected, admired and loved, he's been a fixture for readers of the <inline font-style="italic">Age</inline>, the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald</inline> and even for a while the <inline font-style="italic">Bulletin</inline>.</para>
<para>Through his observations of Australian political life and the great sweep of life beyond politics, he has taught us so much. He's made us laugh. He's made us reflect. He's found joy without ever shying away from sorrow. He's been pointed but never barbed. Crucially, he's never lost sight of humanity, not even in this place, which sometimes does. And he's reminded us of the importance of taking the time to stop and smell the flowers—or at least admire them as you fly past on a motorbike. Tony has always been a harvester of moments, finding the small things that so many of us may miss and deftly weaving them into a much bigger picture. Many writers can deliver a pearl, but few have Tony's love for the humble grain at its heart.</para>
<para>Tony, I know that this isn't a full stop and that, when the mood takes you, you'll still be sharing your words with your readers. Until you do, though, we will follow your advice to 'hold our memories close and polish them every now and then'. On behalf of all of us here and on behalf of your many readers, who admire you, respect you and read every word when they see your by-line: thank you—thank you for what you have done. You have done it with good cheer. You have done it your own way, to quote a great Italian American. Bravo on your career. We wish you all the very best for your future, mate.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I join with the Prime Minister in acknowledging and commending Tony Wright. More than 50 years in journalism is a thoroughly fine innings. It's a tough innings too, especially so many years in the Canberra press gallery. Tony has been professionally scribing since 1970. As he himself acknowledged, he started on a beaten-up typewriter in the age of ink. Some of you may have seen a quite iconic black-and-white photograph of Tony from the 1970s. Everyone in seeing that photo would be drawn in not only by the young man's inquisitive, journalistic gaze as he peers into and beyond the camera but also by his striking, flowing flock of hair befitting both the times and his profession.</para>
<para>Tony, from that young man in his early career to the seasoned journalist we salute in the gallery today, you've seen so much, done so much and written so much. You've gone from a school holiday freelancer for your small country paper to working for the Albury-Wodonga <inline font-style="italic">Border Mail</inline> and as associate editor and special writer for the <inline font-style="italic">Age</inline> and the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald</inline>, covering stories from the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union—iconic events in my lifetime and the lifetimes of so many here—to the fallout of Pol Pot's regime in Cambodia, from the genocide in Rwanda to the ups and downs of Australian politics and elections.</para>
<para>As many have acknowledged, the pieces you've penned have been vivid, informative and a hallmark of clarity. But, more than that, you have a deep appreciation of history. As you've said, if something has happened before, it most likely will happen again. History is often so surprising that it will capture the reader. A reader captured is a reader looking for meaning. You also had wise words for budding journalists in your observation that everyone has a story; you simply have to know the questions to ask, and usually they'll tell you.</para>
<para>Tony, we commend you for more than 50 years of words and stories that have stayed in people's heads and touched people's hearts. In acknowledging your retirement today, we know that no writer ever truly retires, so we wish you well for what's to come.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>73</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MOTIONS</title>
        <page.no>73</page.no>
        <type>MOTIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Veterans' Affairs</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Herbert from moving the following motion immediately—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel has, through his own cruel and reckless actions:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) undermined the safety and welfare of our veterans;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) refused to meet with ex-service organisations concerning the Government's cruel cuts to allied health services;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) disgraced himself by failing to uphold the Australian Defence Force Veterans' Covenant Oath; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) failed to demonstrate due respect to veterans and their families who have served our country selflessly; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) therefore, has no confidence in the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel.</para></quote>
<para>Nothing in this place is more abhorrent than the actions of the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. This prime minister should demand that the veterans' affairs minister sit in here now and answer for his failings instead of walking off, on his phone, with no care in the world. I can tell you, Mr Speaker, that veterans have lost faith in this veterans' affairs minister, and this prime minister should sack him today. He is out of his depth, he is nowhere to be seen, he refuses to meet those brave men and women who serve this nation and now he can't even stay in here and answer for his actions. He is a disgrace.</para>
<para>As I was getting up to read this suspension motion, an important moment, I saw the Leader of the House whoosh everyone away, telling everyone to get out, leave, don't stay—what a disgraceful action! We're talking about veterans' affairs. We're talking about those who serve this nation. But they all run off! There's no minister at the table—no care in the world. No-one cares. This is absolutely disgraceful.</para>
<para>The veterans' covenant is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We, the people of Australia, respect and give thanks to all who have served in our defence force and their families.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We acknowledge the unique nature of military service and the sacrifice demanded of all who commit to defend our nation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We undertake to preserve the memory and deeds of all who have served and promise to welcome, embrace and support all military veterans as respected and valued members of our community.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For what they have done, this we will do.</para></quote>
<para>It is not just a piece of paper; it is a commitment. It is a promise that we give, and it is a bond that we have with our veteran community. And this minister for veterans' affairs has failed that. He has failed the veteran community and their families. He has betrayed those who have served, and he is not fit to hold office.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister lacks the gumption to take action. He can't stand up and sack a hopeless minister who refuses to meet those who have been wounded in action, who've been hurt in service—those who vote for him and those who don't. People's political persuasion shouldn't matter. This minister is failing all. As with how this Labor government normally goes, he'll probably fall up into another position.</para>
<para>We have veterans today who are reaching out to members across the aisle. I've had Labor members come and see me and say how disgraceful the actions of this minister have been. This is not good enough anymore.</para>
<para>We haven't even got through the week and this minister can't answer a question and can't meet with a bunch of veterans—because he has to go to Government House! This minister is not fit to hold the position of veterans' affairs minister—the person who's supposed to have their back, the person who's supposed to stand up and fight for them and the person who is supposed to be their person in government and make sure that they and their families are supported. Instead, the veterans' affairs minister would rather go drink champagne at Government House and can't meet with the families. I'm baffled. I just can't understand how a minister who has such an important care role—this is a care role—couldn't care less and couldn't meet with those that have served.</para>
<para>Now, some of those veterans who I met with have been serving for more than 20-odd years. We had sexual assault survivors. We had representatives from across the country—those whose family members have died by suicide, a mother who held a photo of her son who died by suicide. And it took this opposition, it took members from the crossbench in the other place, to stand up and demand that this minister take a meeting. When he did, he walked in, couldn't shake a hand, didn't look the veterans in the eye, sat down, arms crossed, leant back and said, 'What do you want?' That is not good enough. And then he complained and told these veterans about how he should be at Government House—for the address-in-reply, mind you. This is a ceremonial part of the parliament. I can tell you what. If a bunch of veterans came and saw a veterans' affairs minister in the coalition and said, 'On Saturday, we want to meet,' if that minister didn't meet with them on that Saturday and stay back here in Canberra, I would say they're not fit to hold office. This minister had the opportunity during the parliament—had weeks of notice—and couldn't do it.</para>
<para>When you're thinking and talking about what were the substantive issue here is, it's about healthcare. It's about supporting those who need it. Veterans have different injuries, whether it's a shoulder, whether it's a knee, whether it's from combat or whether it's from peacetime. They have post-traumatic stress disorder. It gets tough. It gets a bit much. You feel everything closing in, and the light that you're looking at is where your treatment is. Then you reach a cap of $5,000. Your treatment goes away and so does that light. As that light goes away, what does the veteran do? I've been told that it will just somehow roll over and they'll get support. Well, that's not what someone from the Department of Veterans' Affairs told me. They told me that they would have to make a phone call and wait for about four hours on hold, and then several months later they may get approved. But what happens for those months? I can tell you what could happen. It could be me and my friends attending another funeral. This is not good enough.</para>
<para>This government, this Labor government, made a commitment, and they have failed it. They have gone back on it, and all the minister keeps trying to do is pivot step and say we're talking about access or funding to allied health professionals, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about access. We're talking about a $5,000 cap that's going to leave our people—my people—worse off. I take the phone calls at 2 am. I'm the one in the morning, like other veterans around the country, talking to mates who aren't doing too well. The minister's not. The Prime Minister's not either. At the end of this parliament sitting, they'll both fly home to their respective areas. They won't give this another thought. I'll be receiving the phone calls. The Prime Minister and the Minister for Veterans' Affairs will leave this parliament at the end of the week and go home with not a care or thought in the world, but our veterans and their families will be worried. The family members will be thinking: 'What happens next? Why can't we get rid of this cut? Why is there a $5,000 cap on allied health for my loved one?' The only action that we want to see today is two things from this Prime Minister: sack the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and abolish this $5,000 cap.</para>
<para>This minister is not up to standard. This minister is just not capable. I'm sure the Minister for Veterans' Affairs is a nice person, but he's not capable of holding this portfolio. People's lives are at stake here. This matters. Instead of taking it seriously, the Leader of the House told everyone to leave this debate. This is an important part of history. We need the Minister for Veterans' Affairs to do their job, and, because they can't, because this minister isn't competent enough, I believe and the coalition believes this Prime Minister only has one thing left to do today, and that is to sack that minister. Get him out. Get someone in who cares. Get a minister who wants to put veterans first—someone who's not more worried about going to Government House, someone who puts veterans and the families of those who have served this nation at the forefront of their mind. And do policy that benefits them, not cuts that are trying to get a saving somewhere. It's simply not good enough.</para>
<para>On behalf of the veterans who have reached out to me, I want to say: I'm sorry; this minister is incompetent, and he shouldn't have a job.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion. And it is with a heavy heart, because the once-great Labor Party once would have actually been here for a suspension of standing and sessional orders. But do you know what this mean-spirited Labor Party will do this week? They'll shut down this debate as soon as I finish speaking, in 4½ minutes time. What do you think previous Labor veterans' affairs ministers—such as Warren Snowdon, Con Sciacca and John Faulkner—would have done? They would have been in here, sitting at the chair, and champing at the bit to defend their position, to defend their honour, to defend veterans—because they stood up for veterans. They stood up for what is right. They stood up for those men and women who put a military uniform on when this parliament told them to go and fight for this country, to deploy to peacekeeping missions. And when those people came back, those ministers defended their rights; they stood up for them.</para>
<para>Yet this government turns its back on those men and women who have worn a military uniform, who have done the right thing by this country, who have served, who have sacrificed and whose memories we should uphold, whose service we should respect. And respect is earned. This minister has not earned the respect of veterans, who have bombarded my office with complaints. They feel let down. They feel disappointed. I bet that those three Labor veterans' affairs ministers I mentioned never got those calls, because they did the right thing. They knew that when veterans needed the help, the care, the support, the wraparound services and the love it was there, because this is generally a bipartisan thing. Generally, the House of Representatives, members of parliament, stand alongside our veterans and are proud to do so and give them the support and the backing they need.</para>
<para>Not all our veterans are broken. Not all our veterans need support. But those who do need it need a minister who cares. They need a minister who stands up in the Expenditure Review Committee and in cabinet—if he were in cabinet, but when he's seconded to cabinet—to say: 'I'm not going to stand for a $5,000 cap on allied health services. I'm not going to tolerate it when the Prime Minister or indeed the Treasury officials say we can make a saving here because there is a saving.' When there's a saving, you know there are going to be cuts. You know there are going to be fewer services available for our veterans—less physiotherapy, less physical help, less psychology.</para>
<para>Our veterans need those services, and they feel so let down. And all they asked for, those veterans who came here on Monday, was 15 to 20 minutes, and the minister had to be dragged kicking and screaming to a meeting with them. Then, when they got that meeting, he rolled his eyes, he folded his arms, he threw his hands back; he wasn't interested at all. All he was interested in was the pate and the bubbly out at Yarralumla; that's all he cared about—and he told them. I mean, it's all well and good to think that, but don't tell those veterans that you just want to get out to Government House. Don't make them feel less worthy.</para>
<para>And they are worthy. I had those Veterans' Voices in my office, and they were outstanding people. They were fine people, and all they wanted was help. The opposition leader had them, too, and the Leader of the Nationals. Many members met them. Labor members met them; they gave them the time. But would the minister give them the time? Finally he did. And when he gave them the time, he showed them contempt. This is simply not good enough.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister needs to do two things today. First of all, he has to scrap this insidious cap—this dreadful insult to our veterans. He needs to get rid of it. He could do it easily. He could find savings elsewhere in the budget. Second, he needs to get rid of the minister. He needs to replace the minister with someone who cares—someone who won't show contempt for our veterans. Labor should also take this suspension motion on: Speak to it. Defend your minister. If he's worth defending, then speak to this motion before the House on why standing and sessional orders need to be suspended. Man up!</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the debate be adjourned.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the debate be adjourned.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
          <division.header>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [15:34]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
            </body>
          </division.header>
          <division.data>
            <ayes>
              <num.votes>83</num.votes>
              <title>AYES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                <name>Burns, J.</name>
                <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                <name>Fernando, C. J.</name>
                <name>France, A. A.</name>
                <name>French, T. A.</name>
                <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                <name>King, C. F.</name>
                <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                <name>Soon, X.</name>
                <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                <name>White, R. P.</name>
                <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                <name>Zappia, A.</name>
              </names>
            </ayes>
            <noes>
              <num.votes>44</num.votes>
              <title>NOES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Aldred, M. R. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Batt, D. J.</name>
                <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                <name>Chaffey, J. L.</name>
                <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                <name>Farley, D.</name>
                <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                <name>Katter, R. C.</name>
                <name>Kennedy, S. P.</name>
                <name>Landry, M. L. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Le, D. T.</name>
                <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                <name>Penfold, A. L.</name>
                <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                <name>Rebello, L. S.</name>
                <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                <name>Wilson, T. R.</name>
                <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
              </names>
            </noes>
            <pairs>
              <num.votes>0</num.votes>
              <title>PAIRS</title>
              <names />
            </pairs>
          </division.data>
          <division.result>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.<br />Debate adjourned.</p>
            </body>
          </division.result>
        </division></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</title>
        <page.no>76</page.no>
        <type>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have received a letter from the honourable member for Riverina proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion today, namely:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Government's neglect of veterans and their needs.</para></quote>
<para>I call upon the honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This is volume 3 of the final report of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide, entitled <inline font-style="italic">Military sexual violence, unacceptable behaviour and military justice</inline>. It runs to 600 or so pages. There are seven volumes of a similar size. There were 122 recommendations from that royal commission. Not one of those recommendations said that there should be a cap on allied health services for our veterans—not a single one. And, yet, in this year's budget, brought down in May right at that spot by the Treasurer, there was a cap introduced for our veterans, for those brave men and women who had the courage, wherewithal, tenacity and determination to put on a uniform and go and represent us in the Australian Army, the Royal Australian Air Force and the Royal Australian Navy, something that our nation asked them to do to help our nation in its time of need, to serve our nation, to protect our people. That is the first order of government—to protect its people. This government has neglected its duty to protect the people who protected us. Those veterans had our backs when we needed them most and, when they need us most, this government has turned its back on them.</para>
<para>This government has introduced an unnecessary and unjust $5,000 cap on the allied health services that care for our veterans, for those who've served our nation, for those whose service and sacrifice we should uphold. When we say 'Lest we forget' that should carry meaning. That should carry worth. It shouldn't be just on 25 April or 11 November that we say, 'Lest we forget'; we should say it every day. We should say it in our hearts, we should say it in our minds and we should say it in our actions.</para>
<para>But our veterans have been let down. They have told us, this week particularly, how badly they feel they have been let down. A group of those veterans came to parliament on Monday seeking a meeting, seeking to be heard—not much given their service and sacrifice. It's little to ask—just a favour. They asked the minister if they could have a meeting. Initially, he said no. He then, after pressure, had a meeting with them, and they felt let down in that meeting because of the minister's demeanour. They felt that the minister showed reckless disregard in his body language in that meeting. That is a shame to hear, Minister, because I felt you were better than that. They feel let down because they came here to ask questions, to ask why the $5,000 allied health cap had been introduced. I know the minister has said on many occasions since the budget, defending this unjust cap, that there will be consultation and that veterans groups will be asked. Well, here was your opportunity, Minister, to have some consultation and to get the feedback from veterans. These were decorated veterans who have served tri-services, veterans who just wanted to be heard. They didn't ask for much. They didn't ask for you to roll your eyes, fold your arms or throw your hands back in the air. They just wanted to be heard.</para>
<para>When, Minister, you talk about consultation, why wasn't the consultation on the allied healthcare cap done prior to the May budget? That is a fair and genuine question. Why wasn't the consultation with stakeholder groups widespread? Why weren't veteran groups consulted? There are many of them. Why weren't the widows guild and so many others asked? Why weren't they consulted?</para>
<para>Then we have veteran mums, such as Julie-Ann Finney. She's the mother of a veteran. I've met Julie-Ann on many, many occasions, and I know you have too, Minister. She feels very badly let down by the lack of consultation and by the lack of respect and care. It comes back to respect. She has lost everything. I don't know what it's like to be in the shoes of a mum's who's lost their son. No parent should ever lose a son, let alone in those circumstances. That is why we had a royal commission. That is why the royal commission went right around this wide brown land, consulting, listening and making recommendations, yet, out of 122 recommendations, not one of them said there should have been an allied health cap.</para>
<para>Interestingly, on the front page of the actual royal commission volumes, there is a sculpture, and it is <inline font-style="italic">For Every Drop Shed in Anguish</inline>. The dedication on the plaque of that sculpture says that it was opened by the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, but he wasn't there. I don't know whether he insisted on his name being on the plaque, but the member for Kingsford Smith opened that particular sculpture. Again, you might shake your head, Minister—and that's what you did to the veterans the other day, and that's the issue.</para>
<para>That's the problem. Sometimes, when you don't like the truth—sometimes, when a minister doesn't like what he or she hears—you just have to cop it. I know. I've been in meetings where it hasn't been that nice, where I haven't liked what I've heard. But you've got to listen. And we're not just talking about your regular stakeholder groups. We're not just talking about your constituents who might come in with a grievance. We're talking about veterans. We're talking about people who are broken, people who have mental health, anguish and anxiety.</para>
<para>We've already heard from members of that group who have claimed that four people—four veterans, four wonderful heroes of this nation—have taken their own lives because of the anxiety brought about by the allied health cap, the $5,000 cap on veterans. They've already taken their lives. If that doesn't fill us with dread about what might come when the policy actually comes into play next year, then I don't know what will and we're in the wrong caper.</para>
<para>Minister, your job is to help, protect and serve those who served us. It's not to be served. The minister's answers in question time left a lot to be desired, because he was blaming what happened in the past. He was blaming the department. Sometimes you have to take responsibility for your own actions. Sometimes you have to fess up. Sometimes you have to know that you've done the wrong thing. And sometimes, when you are a minister and you are going into those big roundtable meetings where the money is being issued prior to a budget, you have to defend and you have to yell and you have to bang on the table and say, 'I'm not going to cop a cut to veterans. I'm not going to take this.'</para>
<para>Prime Minister, do you know what this is going to mean to our veteran community? Never mind the politics. People have to come before politics, and veterans have to come first, and our veterans have been let down. Our veterans feel let down, and they feel let down by the government. They feel let down by this minister and they feel let down by the nation that they served, that they put on the uniform for, that they went out and, in some cases, gave their lives for—their brothers, in the case of one of these members who gave his life. It's just simply not good enough, because our veterans deserve better.</para>
<para>If we've got one job to do in this place, it's to help our veterans to get back into civilian life and to give them every care, support, love and wraparound service they need. It's not to say to them, 'Your service is now going to be so limited that your access to health care is going to be $5,000 and you'll have to go back every time.' The minister will no doubt come to the dispatch box and explain away in talking point form exactly why he thinks the allied health cap is necessary. But it's not necessary, and don't take my word for it, and certainly don't take the minister's word for it. Take the veterans' word, because they're the ones who matter, and they're the ones we should be serving, not ourselves, Minister.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think everybody in this parliament accepts the very real obligation that sits upon all of us as members and on any government to live up to the solemn obligation to make sure that those who serve our nation in our uniform are properly looked after during their service and after their service and that the families they that support them are also properly looked after.</para>
<para>When I became the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel, the first people that I contacted were some of the mothers who had endured the hellish tragedy of having their children who had served in our Defence force take their own lives. I'll never properly understand what that would feel like, but I did understand the importance of the campaign that they had run to ensure that there was a Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. I wanted them to know that I took that very seriously and that I would continue to engage with them in relation to the royal commission as it was being undertaken and to make sure that we lived up to what they were campaigning for in implementing recommendations from that royal commission. I also then set about making sure that I was regularly engaging with our serving personnel, our veterans and their families, not just at the senior level, not just in national organisations and peak bodies and generals and admirals but the vast majority who have served and are still serving.</para>
<para>At the first base that I visited I made sure that I got to have an informal engagement with our enlisted Army members. We had a barbecue, and I was really touched by one of the Army personnel there who had taken it upon himself to go around all his mates and bring up a list of their grievances and concerns. You'd make a good shop steward. I get why he did it, because no-one necessarily wanted to come and front the minister with 'these are all of my things'. But I was really glad that he did it because the purpose of the visit was to be able to talk to our personnel and understand their gripes on the ground. What were the things that were seeing them leave the Defence Force? What were the things that were causing them harm? What were the things that we could do better?</para>
<para>I've continued to do that in my visits around the country, visiting subbranches of RSLs, Vietnam Veterans Association, new younger ex-service organisations representing our contemporary veterans, service providers and advocates—meeting people where they are so they can share with me their story so that I can build what it is that we need to be doing to make things better for them. That's an obligation that I mentioned before. That is a national obligation.</para>
<para>The reality is service has touched all parts of our country. One of the things that I really like about the local war memorial in Armidale, a town that really grew because of its brickworks, is that the war memorial is made of bricks. It lists the names of those who passed away, who made the ultimate sacrifice in World War I. When you look at those names and at those last names, they're prominent families of the district, but they're also the names that lakes and parks and streets are all named after. That reflects the impact of that conflict has had across our country for over a century where real families were impacted by service, not just by losing a loved one, whether it was a son or a daughter or a father or mother or sister or brother, but the flow-on effect that that can have throughout a community.</para>
<para>It's engaging with those stories that has certainly made me even more determined to make sure that our government improves the story for our veteran community and for our serving personnel. It's why, when I became minister, one of the first things that I did at this dispatch box was say sorry to our defence members and our serving personnel and their families for where things hadn't worked, because the first step is acknowledging those failures. It's why, after being sworn in in June and receiving an interim report from the royal commission in August, we provided the government's response in September. We moved quickly, making sure that we were delivering additional funding to DVA—it is now the best funded it has been in three decades—so it could employ the additional people to make sure we got through that claims backlog of nearly 42,000 claims of veterans that had not even been looked at by someone in the department.</para>
<para>Since that time, we have seen claims move quicker. And we're seeing more claims come into the system. During the financial year before last, nearly double the number of determinations were made than in 2022. The financial year just closed saw an increase of nearly 20 per cent, and there is still more work to do. The result of that has meant that the funding, the money going out to support our veteran community with health services, support services, rehabilitation, treatment and compensation has increased by 50 per cent. Yet there is still more to do. That's why we undertook the really important and complex work of making sure we fixed up the veterans entitlement system through the VETS act, moving to a single system so that, for veterans and their families, it would be clearer what they are entitled to, easier to access those support services and quicker to have their claims processed, delivering better overall service and support to our veteran community and their families.</para>
<para>It's why we've delivered, in the areas of Australia that have got the highest concentration of our veteran community, veteran and family hubs so people could have coordinated access to care. It's why we delivered, for the first time in decades, funding specifically for housing and wraparound support services to support our veteran community that were experiencing homelessness. Of course, we also invested in a veteran employment program. And I find it so wonderful when businesses come up to me and say, 'How can I employ a veteran?' because they recognise the value of having veterans working in their businesses.</para>
<para>It's why we did such swift work in delivering our government's response to the final report of the royal commission. That wasn't the only report of the royal commission. Its second report was about the lived experience of those that came and gave evidence to the royal commission. It is truly tragic reading. People should not have had to experience the things that those people experienced. We are so grateful that they shared those stories with the royal commission. Frankly, in parts, it makes you really angry at some of the things those people and their family members had to put up with—and they should not have had to.</para>
<para>The royal commission handed down that final report in September 2024. In December 2024, we provided the government's response—a pathway forward on over 100 of the recommendations and commitment to work through the remaining recommendations. By the end of last year, we had implemented a quarter of those recommendations, and we're on track for two-thirds to be implemented by the end of this year. That included delivering what the royal commission itself said was its most important recommendation: the Defence and Veterans' Service Commission, which has been up and running since September last year, providing oversight on how government goes about implementing those recommendations. It's already doing its work.</para>
<para>We've also made a significant change by delivering the Veteran and Family Wellbeing Agency. The agency is tasked with those broader wellbeing supports. It's not just about processing claims through DVA, though incredibly important that is, but making sure that people who need assistance in accessing employment services, education services or homelessness services—the range of different supports—are able to do that. There's a place for them to go to get that assistance. The agency is already doing that work, and it's great to see that it is delivering.</para>
<para>I've never said that what government has done is closed and we don't need to do any more. We are working at pace to deliver the recommendations of the royal commission so that we can make the real change that our veteran community need and deserve so that they will have better access to services and support that our country owes them, because that's what they deserve as part of our obligation to our serving men and women.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>To all those who continue to serve this nation in uniform, our veterans and their families: I note that the freedoms that we have today are on the back of hard-fought battles and wars and of sacrifices that you have made, and, today, I want to say I'm sorry. I'm sorry that you've been let down. I'm sorry that the government has placed this $5,000 cap on your allied health. This isn't about political partisanship; this is about a government that has let you down.</para>
<para>Veterans from around the country have reached out to many of us in this place. They have lost faith in the veterans' affairs minister, and I have too. His position is untenable. When you lose the faith of those that you're supposed to support and when you refuse to meet with those brave men and women who have served this nation, then you have lost the support of all veterans from around the country—veterans not just in Townsville and not just in Tassie but even in the Northern Territory, in Palmerston.</para>
<para>Veteran Shane Pascoe-Bell has a long list of mental and physical injuries dating back to his service with the 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, which was a parachute infantry battalion in 1999 in East Timor, where he served. He said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">When you are parachuting, you are hitting the ground at 7 metres a second with 50-plus kilos of equipment.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I've just had surgery on my knee, I've got a plate in my neck, and I have to have a few more artificial disks put into my lower back—the workload just eventually broke me down.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I am already asking myself whether I am going to have to go without physio for a couple of months, or not see the counsellor for a couple of months.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">You start to weigh up what part of you, health-wise, is the most important, so that's driving up anxiety among everyone at the moment.</para></quote>
<para>Veterans shouldn't have to ration their medical treatment. Veterans shouldn't have to be picking whether it's mental health support or whether it's physio. It's just not what our bravest—those we sent into war, into peacekeeping and into humanitarian disasters—should have to be worried about. This veteran went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This is just another kick in the guts where veterans will potentially be in a worse-off situation than they would have been before the Royal Commission …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Like, today I went and had my hearing aids maintained and I had a psych appointment; I have an osteopath appointment once a week, so what do I drop off?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Just my physiology once a week would use 80 per cent of that $5,000.</para></quote>
<para>I won't get through it all, but I received a message. It says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am a survivor of Military Sexual Trauma.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I required two inpatient psychiatric admissions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In the first 12 months following my discharge, well over $10,000 was spent on my mental health treatment alone.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That was not excessive treatment.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That was necessary treatment.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Military Sexual Trauma is a whole-of-body injury.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It can affect psychological and physical health, the nervous system, relationships, employment, trust, identity and the ability to function long after a person leaves Defence.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I am angry and in disbelief …</para></quote>
<para>These are the types of messages that I receive nearly every day from heartbroken and distressed veterans and family members who, at this dispatch box just now, still did not get an answer from the Minister for Veterans' Affairs.</para>
<para>We moved a suspension motion; the minister could have addressed the parliament. The minister just had 10 minutes to talk on this MPI but didn't talk about the substance of what people are nervous and scared about. Veterans around the country have lost faith in this minister and his ability to do his job, and I have too.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister needs to be putting veterans and their families first today. He needs to scrap this $5,000 cap on allied health, and he needs to sack the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. He must listen to those that he may, sometime, have to send to war. We must listen to our veterans; our veterans want Minister Matt Keogh gone.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before anything else, I want to say something that should never need qualification or explanation. To every Australian who has worn the uniform of this nation: Thank you. Thank you for your service, thank you for the sacrifices that you and your families have made, and thank you for accepting a responsibility that very few of us will ever be asked to carry. When a person raises their hand and swears an oath to serve Australia, they do something that is quite extraordinary. They place the interests of their country and the interests of their fellow Australians alongside but more often ahead of their own. We owe them our gratitude, and we owe them more than gratitude expressed in ceremonial occasions. We owe them our respect and our remembrance, and we owe them a commitment that when their service is completed they will never be forgotten.</para>
<para>Every veteran has a story, some who served in times of war and conflict and others in times of peace. Some spent years away from home, and others carried responsibilities that may never be fully understood by those of us who did not wear the uniform and who did not serve. But they share something important, and that is that they answered the call to service. Their families also served. They carried the uncertainty of separation. They carried the worry of deployment and the challenges that come with a life of service, and they also deserve our thanks.</para>
<para>Australia has been fortunate to have generations of men and women willing to stand in defence of our country and of our values. We should be grateful for that service, and we should never allow gratitude to become simply a word that we constantly repeat. Our veterans should know that their country remembers what they gave, respects what they did and values the contribution they continue to make for Australia and for their local communities.</para>
<para>I want to briefly talk about some of that local support that our government has provided to our veteran community, particularly on the Central Coast. And when I make reference to the Central Coast I talk about the electorate of Robertson in the south, the electorate of Dobell in the north and also the bottom third of the electorate of Shortland. One example of that support from this government has been the Building Excellence in Support and Training funding, or the BEST funding. This program supports those ESOs, ex-service organisations, to deliver free compensation and wellbeing advocacy services, and there are some amazing organisations on the Central Coast that provide this service. Recently, in the 2026 funding round for BEST funding, we saw that the Central Coast New South Wales Legacy received funding, as did the Vietnam Veterans Peacekeepers and Peacemakers Association of Australia Central Coast Sub-Branch, who do amazing work for our Vietnam veterans, amazing work for our peacekeepers and peacemakers on the Central Coast.</para>
<para>More broadly, our government has increased the TPI pension and tripled the GP veteran access payment. It's so important that our veterans can access primary care where they are, when they need it. We've boosted veteran home care and improved access to crisis support. But one thing I'm particularly proud of and that I know the member for Dobell is also particularly proud of is the Veterans' and Families' Hubs that have opened across Australia, including the one that opened on the Central Coast in the electorate of Dobell, in the suburb of Wyong.</para>
<para>So really this government is providing support to our veteran community. But I think it is also important that we provide our thanks, that we provide our gratitude for those who have served our nation and who have served their local communities in times of war and conflict as well as in times of peace.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This week, Australia marked 60 years since the Battle of Long Tan. On 18 August 1966, 105 young Australians and three New Zealanders of D company, 6RAR, faced an enemy force many times their size. Eighteen Australians were killed and 24 wounded. We honour their courage with the words 'lest we forget'.</para>
<para>We cannot honour service at a memorial and then ration care when veterans need their country, yet this is exactly what Labor is proposing. From 1 July 2027, veteran card holders face a $5,000 annual limit for allied health services. That's psychology, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, exercise physiology, podiatry, dietetics, social work and more all within one $5,000 envelope.</para>
<para>Let's remember who Labor's $5,000 cap affects: gold card holders, white card holders, war widows and dependents. It affects Mallee residents, from my electorate, one of whom I am seeing next Wednesday back in my electorate office. From Mildura to Daisy Hill and from Brim to Merbein, I have heard loud and clear the outcry within Mallee and, even just beyond, from Maiden Gully, in the Labor held electorate of Bendigo, about Labor's cruel cap on allied health services for veterans.</para>
<para>The gold card represented a promise that this nation would care for those who served their country. Labor has now put a cap on that promise—a price tag. Labor booked $748 million in savings from veterans and their families in the 12 May budget. The DVA calls the cap 'a threshold for review of clinical effectiveness'. Changing the word 'cap' to bureaucratic gobbledegook and capping allied health services with a dollar figure does not change the complex needs of veterans.</para>
<para>Labor is complicating this policy gaffe by increasing provider fees while fixing the veterans' annual allied health envelope at $5,000. A standard psychology consultation rises from $163.40 to $260. At that rate, $5,000 buys around 19 sessions a year—less than one session a fortnight—assuming that's the only service they need. For a veteran living with complex trauma, that matters. For a veteran managing both PTSD and a service related physical injury, as we heard earlier, the question becomes brutally simple: do I see my psychologist, or do I see my physiotherapist? That is not integrated health care; it is care rationing.</para>
<para>The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide made 122 recommendations after hearing devastating evidence about systems, bureaucracy and delays that failed serving and former ADF members. Its lesson was not that veterans needed another administrative hurdle. Yet the process for approving treatment beyond the $5,000 cap has not been finalised. Veterans may require further medical justification and prior financial approval. That means more forms, more uncertainty and more bureaucracy.</para>
<para>Ten national veterans service organisations have told the Minister for Veterans' Affairs they do not support the cap. RSL Australia has warned of constraints and contradictory messages about access to care. Julie-Ann Finney, whose advocacy following the death of her son David helped secure the royal commission, has described capping treatment as unfathomable. Yet veterans advocates who travelled to Canberra had their first request to meet with Minister Keogh refused. Veterans and their advocates are still telling us they are not being heard. A veterans affairs minister should not need political pressure before making time to hear from our veterans. Lest we forget.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Gilmore is proudly home to 5,775 veterans, the highest number of veterans of any electorate in New South Wales. As home to Australia's only naval air station, HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Albatross</inline>, Gilmore has more than 7½ thousand serving members, also the highest number of any electorate in New South Wales. It's important to note that figure doesn't include all the local defence members working in the nearby Jervis Bay Territory at HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Creswell</inline>, home to the Royal Australian Naval College.</para>
<para>Defence and defence industry are our biggest employers, and I am immensely proud of the sacrifices our current and former serving defence members have made and continue to make for our country and our community. I have worked in Defence at HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Albatross</inline>, I'm the mum of an Army veteran and I'm involved on the ground with many of our defence and veteran organisations, so I know how important it is to support health and wellbeing. I've always supported our veterans, our defence members and their families, and I will continue to do so.</para>
<para>I'm extremely proud to be part of a government that is investing $5.7 billion in 2026-27 to support our veterans and is delivering on the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. Importantly, we're delivering $169.7 million in funding over five years to increase fees for allied health providers from 1 July 2027. This is the largest investment in allied health fees for veterans in more than 20 years.</para>
<para>The changes to the veterans support system that came into effect on 1 July this year have simplified the veterans compensation system. They have made it easier for veterans and families to know what they are entitled to and make it quicker for DVA to process their claims.</para>
<para>There has been a lot said about the $5,000 annual threshold, but veterans can rest assured that there will be pathways to access additional support for those who need it. For most veterans and families, there will be little or no change to their current situation. In fact, the current 12-session treatment cycle will be removed, which means veterans can access more than 12 allied health sessions without needing an additional referral, which is a real bonus in my regional area. These changes aim to make it easier to access care, reduce unnecessary approvals and improve the veterans support system.</para>
<para>I will always stand up for our veterans. I campaigned heavily for Invictus funding, which is vitally important for veterans in my community. I've advocated for local veteran organisations. Recently, I was proud to deliver federal funding for two Shoalhaven community organisations for grassroots wellbeing programs to support local veterans and their families. RSL LifeCare received funding to hold two Indigenous engagement workshops at the Shoalhaven Veteran and Family Hub, which also houses Invictus Australia, Open Arms and veterans and families counselling services. The workshops will provide a fantastic opportunity for local Indigenous veterans and will also promote the role of First Nations veterans and their families in our local community. The Sussex Inlet RSL sub-Branch members were also thrilled to receive funding to improve accessibility to their memorial hall.</para>
<para>I'm also proud to have supported three community projects across Gilmore under the Albanese Labor government's Saluting Their Service Commemorative Grants Program. The Bomaderry RSL sub-Branch members will upgrade their war memorial with custom benches that pay tribute to military personnel and will honour past and present defence members, their commitment and their sacrifice. The Kiama-Jamberoo RSL sub-Branch will restore the wheels on its Japanese cannon to preserve a solid reminder of the challenges faced during wartime and the efforts made to defend Australia. The Jamberoo RFS will install a new flagpole and do landscaping for local remembrance services in the village. I thank the local veterans that have contacted me about allied health, and I encourage them to participate in the consultation sessions.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to acknowledge the veterans that came and saw me yesterday in my parliamentary office for their service. Kirk from Nirimba was injured while serving our country, and he still requires ongoing physiotherapy for that service related injury. He's calculated that physiotherapy just once a fortnight could exhaust his treatment allocation, forcing him back through another approval process simply to continue care already prescribed by his doctor. Minister, why should Kirk have to keep asking permission to treat an injury he received serving this country?</para>
<para>Mark from Little Mountain is a retired Air Force firefighter. He lives with chronic pain, complex injuries and multiple service related conditions. His health needs are not confined to one neat category. Different conditions require different providers and different forms of treatment. Under the system, he faces separate referrals and repeated trips back through the medical bureaucracy just to continue managing injuries the Commonwealth already accepts as service related.</para>
<para>Veterans with complex conditions are precisely the people who will feel these changes most heavily. How many times, Minister, should a veteran have to prove that he or she is still injured before this government simply lets their doctors treat them?</para>
<para>Ellie from Meridan Plains served for seven years in the Royal Australian Navy, including two Middle East deployments and service in the South China Sea. She now needs psychology, physiotherapy and dietetics to manage injuries resulting from that service. From July 2027, Labor proposes to place all of that allied health treatment inside the same $5,000 envelope. That means veterans with both physical and psychological injuries are effectively being asked to make a choice between different parts of their health care. Ellie should not be forced to decide whether her mental health, her physical rehabilitation or another clinically necessary treatment matters most. Which treatment does this government expect Ellie to give up first?</para>
<para>Mark from Parrearra has only recently been medically discharged from the Royal Australian Navy. He's living with lung disease, physical injuries and mental health conditions arising from his service. His recovery is only just beginning. Yet before that recovery is properly started, he already knows that the government intends to put a $5,000 cap around his allied health treatment. For a recently discharged veteran dealing with multiple serious conditions, that creates uncertainty at exactly the point when the system should be giving him certainty and support. We should be helping veterans transition from Defence into civilian life, not telling them from day one where the financial limit on their treatment sits. Minister, what does this government say to a veteran whose recovery has barely begun but who already knows where this government's financial limit is?</para>
<para>Joe from Palmwoods is an Afghanistan and Iraq veteran. Joe was medically discharged in 2011 and is TPI with multiple accepted service related conditions. He requires around 20 allied health appointments each month and expects to reach the $5,000 cap very quickly. His GP considers his treatment clinically necessary, and it is coordinated across the treatment team. He fears the exemption process will add bureaucracy and interrupt treatment that has helped him make significant progress. Joe believes DVA should target providers who rort the system rather than impose blanket caps on veterans with genuine complex needs.</para>
<para>And Teresa from Little Mountain relies on regular psychology, TMS, dietetics and exercise physiology treatment to manage PTSD. She estimates the $5,000 allied cap would be exhausted within months.</para>
<para>Why are we imposing a cap? Why is this government imposing a cap on treatment that is helping veterans stay well and preventing greater healthcare costs later?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Not too far from this chamber, just down the corridor and up a couple of flights of stairs, is my office. When you walk through the door of my office, hanging on the wall in my part of my suite is a quilt that has the history of some of my family's service, dating back more than 100 years: sacrifice in World War I, service and sacrifice in World War II, my service, my uncle's, great uncle's—and there is a lot more service that is not recognised on that quilt.</para>
<para>When I walk through the streets of my electorate, whether I'm in Gawler, in Elizabeth or in Salisbury, veterans are at my every turn. I am extremely fortunate to have an electorate, in the seat of Spence, that has a very high number of serving personnel and a very high number of veterans. It's no surprise, because we have RAAF Bass Edinburgh that sits at the very heart of my electorate and from there emanate stories of service on a daily basis. Whether you sit at the St George's cafe opposite the Coles DC, just down the road from the base, over at the Elizabeth Shopping Centre, or in the local boozer at the Gawler RSL, you're never too far away from a conversation about someone's service.</para>
<para>So, when I come to this place, people's service is always front of mind. I remember that, when I was elected to this place, the royal commission was underway. Nick Kaldas put a challenge to each and every single one of us in this place—that we must do better—because for more than three decades we haven't delivered the level of service that our veterans have expected. Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, the Department of Veterans' Affairs was failing veterans abhorrently.</para>
<para>When I look at the MPI statement—'The government's neglect of veterans and their needs'—I go straight to the fact that, when we came to office here, the first order of business was to put all of our resources into dealing with the backlog of claims. Now, I'm not apportioning blame to either side of the chamber in this debate regarding that backlog. It was allowed to fester for far too long. The veterans deserved better. And so we skilled up and we delivered a much bigger workforce to work through that list of claims that was frustrating not just veterans but also their families. That's not neglect. That's meeting people where they're at and answering their call. That's what we did.</para>
<para>In the lead-up to my election, I stood with the member for Blair as the shadow minister for veterans' affairs, and we announced that we would be investing in a veterans and family wellbeing hub in my electorate, and I'm proud to say that, in a week and a half's time, we will celebrate the one-year anniversary of that being delivered. The best thing about that veterans and wellbeing hub is that it was designed by the people and for the people. It is so, so successful. We have people walking through those doors every single day. I met up with one of my ESO leaders just yesterday in the Speaker's Courtyard to talk about how successful the veterans and family wellbeing hub has been for our community. That's not neglect. This government has been doing everything it can to better help our veterans and thank them for their service.</para>
<para>I want to provide some content and detail to people out there that want to be engaged in this debate, shape the consultation feedback process to the minister and provide constructive feedback. You can do that via the DVA consultation hub and you can do that via the direct feedback form at dva.gov.au. Be involved in the discussion and help shape a better system to honour your service.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PENFOLD</name>
    <name.id>248895</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The purpose of the Department of Veterans' Affairs should be very simple: to support the men and women who've served our country and to ensure they are treated with dignity and respect. That premise should be at the heart of every DVA process and procedure and every decision that the minister and the government take. But clearly with this government and with this minister it isn't.</para>
<para>Labor's decision to impose a $5,000 annual allied healthcare cap from July next year doesn't treat veterans with dignity or respect. Instead, it's the ultimate show of disrespect. It's heartless. It's shameful. This is not how you treat veterans. Where is the dignity and respect in a policy that effectively denies veterans the health care they need, the health care they deserve? When members of the Coalition of Veterans' Voices came to Canberra to raise their concerns about the policy, Minister Keogh, the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, initially refused to meet with them. He refused to even look them in the eye when speaking about them when they were standing in this chamber. How can the very person whose one job it is to listen to and represent the interests of veterans treat them with such contempt?</para>
<para>I thank the veteran advocates that came to see me this week and all those from my own electorate that have written to me advocating to ensure their fellow veterans get the support they deserve. I'd like to share what some of those veterans have said to me about this policy. Matthew from Coopernook said that $5,000 cut would be exhausted in approximately six weeks due to the level of treatment he genuinely requires. After six weeks, Matthew will have to wait weeks or months for the DVA to assess and approve additional treatment whilst he goes without any care. Continuity of treatment is critical. Mental health recovery and physical rehabilitation should not be interrupted by administrative processes. Delays increase anxiety, worsen symptoms and reduce functional capacity and will potentially lead to more expensive interventions or hospital admissions in the future. Ian from Tuncurry encapsulates the failure of this policy well. He said that the suggestion that additional funding may be available in exceptional circumstances introduces uncertainty, additional approvals and delay into an already overstretched system. Veterans should not be placed in a position where necessary treatment is interrupted while administrative processes determine whether care can continue. Vikki from Karuah perhaps best summarises the government's appalling policy. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Veterans are not a line item. They are Australians who put their lives, bodies and futures on the line for this country. They served when Australia asked them to serve. When they come home injured, the least we can do is make sure they can access the care they need.</para></quote>
<para>The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide told us that veterans need greater choice and autonomy, not more obstacles between them and the support they need. The government itself acknowledges that around one in 10 veteran card holders who use allied health services will exceed the cap. Veterans have lived with DVA bureaucracy. They know what delays mean. They know what happens when a provider decides dealing with DVA is simply too difficult. They know that every additional administrative hurdle can become another barrier to care.</para>
<para>DVA processes exist to serve veterans. Veterans do not exist to serve DVA processes. So, Minister Keogh, scrap the arbitrary $5,000 threshold, fix the provider and payment problems, give veterans genuine choice over their care and ensure that every process, every procedure and every decision made by DVA reflects the Australian Defence Veterans Covenant oath which has been said here numerous times today. I'll repeat it:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We, the people of Australia, respect and give thanks to all who have served in our defence force and their families.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We acknowledge the unique nature of military service and the sacrifice demanded of all who commit to defend our nation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We undertake to preserve the memory and deeds of all who have served and promise to welcome, embrace and support all military veterans as respected and valued members of our community.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For what they have done, this we will do.</para></quote>
<para>Minister, I ask you to serve the people of Australia by serving these words in what you do. Take action now. Scrap the cap.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Let me start by thanking the veterans and the RSLs serving the veterans in Hasluck at Ellenbrook, Bassendean and Bellevue and also the families, the volunteers, the committee members and the advocates who give so much of themselves to support those who have served. They understand better than most that supporting veterans is not something we only do a few days of the year.</para>
<para>I've spoken previously in this House about my own service in the Army Reserve. I have always been careful not to overstate that experience. Compared to those who have deployed, served overseas or faced conflict, my experience was very limited, but it gave me an appreciation for the culture of service. It taught me about duty, it taught me about teamwork and it taught me that military service affects not only the individual who wears the uniform but entire families and communities. It's always easy for people to remember just the Anzacs, but the veterans of today are those who served more recently, in conflicts such as Vietnam—the nashos—the gulf and Afghanistan, and those peacekeepers, as well as those who have served in disasters here at home.</para>
<para>Next week, I will join with the ADF for parliamentary exchange, as I have done before, and in September I will host my fourth ADF intern. I carry their stories and their perspectives into my work. One of the first stories I told in this parliament was about a veteran from the Perth Hills—a 30-year-old veteran, a man whose body was riddled with shrapnel, a man who was physically and mentally broken, a man who asked me why he could not access the support he needed. That story has stayed with me because it captures what this debate should really be about.</para>
<para>Under Minister Matt Keogh, the government has implemented 32 royal commission recommendations already, with two-thirds now expected to be completed by the year's end. He has consolidated the VETS act in the biggest reform in a century. He has committed more than $770 million in additional funding to support the implementation of these royal commission recommendations. He has invested hundreds of additional staff in DVA to reduce the claims backlogs and improve decision-making times. He has improved treatment and rehabilitation pathways for veterans through a wellbeing focused approach. He has increased support for mental health interventions for earlier access to care. He has established consultation mechanisms to strengthen veterans advocacy. He has made the largest investment in allied health fees for veterans in more than two decades, and there's a lot more.</para>
<para>Are these reforms complete? No. Is more work required? Absolutely. But, unlike those opposite, we are getting on to do the work. The member for Riverina's MPI is strident, but I find myself asking a simple question: if they were so important, why didn't the coalition do them when they had the chance? They were in government for almost a decade. They left a backlog of 42,000 claims. They could have increased DVA staffing and reduced the claims backlog years earlier. They didn't. They could have driven cultural reform within Veterans' Affairs years earlier, and they didn't. They could have expanded wraparound support services for veterans and families years earlier. They didn't. They could have acted on longstanding concerns from veterans about delays and bureaucracies years earlier. They didn't. They could have embraced a prevention and wellbeing approach to veteran support years earlier. They didn't. Instead, many veterans spent years battling a system that too often treated them like a problem to be managed rather than Australians to be supported.</para>
<para>Supporting veterans should never be partisan. Every member of this House owes a debt to those who have worn Australia's uniform. It's a debt we can never fully repay, as those who serve write us a blank cheque when they put on that uniform, and every government carries the responsibility to try to work to repay that debt through practical action. To the veterans of Hasluck, to the members of my Bassendean, Ellenbrook and Bellevue RSLs, and to veterans right across Australia, I say this: your service is valued. Your voices are absolutely important; the consultation process is open, and they will be heard there. This government remains committed to ensuring you get the support you have earned and to ensuring that it's actually delivered.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The discussion is now concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>85</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 2) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>85</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7502" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 2) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>85</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>85</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7487" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration of Senate Message</title>
            <page.no>85</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the amendments be agreed to.</para></quote>
<para>I want to thank members in this House and the other place for their contributions on this bill. I understand that the bill and the scheme more broadly are deeply felt by this parliament, as they are across the general community. I also want to acknowledge the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee and thank all of those from the disability community and beyond who provided submissions and turned up to hearings and provided their evidence to those hearings.</para>
<para>The government has listened carefully to the views that were put forward by members and senators, as well as the evidence heard in that inquiry, and, as a result of that meaningful engagement, has agreed to 63 amendments to the bill—30 of them in this House and 33 in the other place. I particularly want to thank the opposition for their constructive engagement throughout this process and for their support for the government amendments that were moved in the other place. These amendments strengthen participant safeguards and make the laws clearer and easier to understand.</para>
<para>Significant among those amendments are an amendment to clarify how support determinations will work and who they apply to. This amendment also strengthens safeguards for participants who require 24-hour disability care on a continuous basis.</para>
<para>Another amendment clarifies what a parent or parents are expected to provide for a child with a disability for the purposes of the NDIA considering whether a support is reasonable and necessary. These expectations do not include the additional support a child needs due to their disability when compared to children of a similar age. This amendment ensures the NDIA must consider the risk of harm to informal supports, family relationships and informal networks if a support is not to be funded.</para>
<para>In addition to clarifying specific provisions and addressing unintended consequences, these amendments build on the government's commitment around fighting fraud and stopping the rorts. These amendments ban kickbacks and inducements. This is going to protect participants from exploitative provider practices that might expose them to financial, health and other safety risks. This amendment adds additional integrity related offences, sending a stronger message that there will be consequences that match the seriousness of wrongdoing in this area. We've improved whistleblower protections to be in line with best practice. We know it is important to encourage individuals to report wrongdoing without fear of unfair treatment or harm.</para>
<para>The National Disability Insurance Scheme is truly one of Australia's greatest social and human rights achievements. It has transformed lives, expanded opportunity and redefined what is possible for people with disability, their families and their carers. However, without action, the future of the NDIS has been at risk. Rapid growth is placing pressure on the scheme. Fraud and exploitation are undermining its integrity, and the scheme has deviated from its original purpose of providing lifelong support to Australians with permanent and significant disability. That's why the government has remained utterly steadfast in its commitment to deliver this bill. It's the right thing to do to protect the NDIS for future generations. This bill delivers on key reforms to strengthen the scheme and ensure it can continue to support people with permanent and significant disability. The reforms will also improve the quality and the reliability of supports that participants receive. They'll strengthen safeguards and oversight, helping to protect people with disability from harm, exploitation and, frankly, just poor practice. They'll provide greater clarity around eligibility, improve how NDIS plans are managed and administered and provide clearer rules about how funding can be used. They'll strengthen integrity measures to better address fraud and ensure funding is directed to the supports that participants genuinely need.</para>
<para>Importantly, these reforms have been shaped by feedback from people with disability, and their families and carers, as well as advocates, providers and the broader disability community, and we will continue to work with the disability community as implementation progresses. Australians expect the NDIS to support people with a disability and their families and to continue to transform their lives, and that is what this bill delivers—a stronger, safer and more sustainable NDIS that will continue changing lives for decades to come.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>102</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7458" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report from Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>102</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendment moved by the member for Kooyong be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [16:51]<br />(The Deputy Speaker—Mr Boyce)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>10</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>67</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived. </p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question now is that the amendment moved by the member for Canning be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [17:00]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>41</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aldred, M. R. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Batt, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chaffey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Kennedy, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Le, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Penfold, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Rebello, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>84</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.<br />Original question agreed to.<br />Bill read a second time.<br />Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For the information of honourable members, I present a replacement explanatory memorandum to the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>104</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move the amendment circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 17), after Part 1, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 1A — Amendment of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">6A After regulation 4DA</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4DB Importation of tobacco manufacturing equipment</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Importation of tobacco manufacturing equipment without permission is prohibited</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The importation of tobacco manufacturing equipment into Australia is prohibited under this regulation unless a permission to import the equipment has been granted in writing by the Minister or an authorised person and the permission is produced to the Collector.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Application for permission</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) An applicant for a permission under subregulation (1) must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) lodge a written application with the Minister or an authorised person; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) give to the Minister or authorised person any information that the Minister or authorised person reasonably requires for the purpose of making a decision on the application.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Dealing with application for permission</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) In considering whether to grant a permission, the Minister or authorised person may consider any relevant matter.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The Minister or authorised person must not grant a permission unless the applicant gives all the information required by the Minister or authorised person under paragraph (2)(b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) The Minister or authorised person may grant a permission subject to conditions or requirements, specified in the permission, to be complied with by the holder of the permission.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Revocation of permission</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) The Minister or authorised person may, in writing, revoke a permission if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the holder of the permission does not comply with a condition or requirement of the permission; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Minister or authorised person is satisfied that revocation is necessary:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) for the protection of the revenue; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) for ensuring compliance with the Customs Acts.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Notice of decision to refuse or revoke permission</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) If the Minister or authorised person decides:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) not to grant a permission; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) to revoke a permission;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">the Minister or authorised person must give the applicant or holder of the permission written notice of the decision as soon as practicable after making the decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) In this regulation:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">authorised person</inline> means an APS employee in the Department who is authorised in writing by the Minister to be an authorised person for the purposes of this regulation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">tobacco manufacturing equipment</inline> means equipment for use in manufacture or production of, or designed or adapted to manufacture or produce, tobacco.</para></quote>
<para>I rise to speak in support of the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026. This bill aims to expand law enforcement powers to investigate illicit tobacco related offences and increases the penalties and consequences for persons involved in these crimes.</para>
<para>The Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs told the National Illicit Tobacco and E-cigarettes Symposium in March this year that official estimates show that 50 to 60 per cent of tobacco sold in Australia in 2024-25 was illicit. Organised crime groups earned an estimated $4.1 billion to $6.9 billion in profit from this trade during this period, an estimated excise evasion of up to $11.8 billion. In his speech, the minister stated that this may get worse before it gets better.</para>
<para>The amendment I'm introducing today is a proactive step recommended by the Cancer Council Australia to help ensure the situation we are facing gets better, not worse. I thank the minister for engaging with the Cancer Council Australia directly on this amendment, which would designate tobacco manufacturing equipment as a prohibited import under the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956. It would make it an offence to import such equipment into Australia unless permission has been granted in writing by the relevant minister or authorised person. This would ban the importation of tobacco manufacturing equipment intended for use in the illegal manufacture, production, design or adaptation of tobacco products.</para>
<para>This is a sensible and uncontroversial amendment. Australia already controls tobacco products and unmanufactured tobacco at the border, but illicit operators can still obtain or import the machinery that converts loose-leaf tobacco or counterfeit inputs into mass produced cigarettes. Current enforcement then becomes reactive. Authorities must find the machine after it has entered Australia and often after production has begun. This is not hypothetical; industrial-scale tobacco machinery is being used right now in Australia for illicit production.</para>
<para>In January this year, authorities raided a Rouse Hill self-storage facility in North-Western Sydney and found a tobacco manufacturing machine with capacity to produce up to 3.6 million cigarettes a day. Australian Border Force—the ABF—linked the operation to organised crime. We need a stronger mechanism to stop tobacco manufacturing equipment at the border before it becomes operational.</para>
<para>This amendment is justified because it would, firstly, disrupt illicit manufacture upstream by allowing Australian Border Force to seize suspect machinery at the border rather than waiting for post-import raids. Second, it would close the gap between product and production controls, since tobacco products and unmanufactured tobacco are already controlled but machinery is not addressed in the same direct way. Third, it would align Australia with international best practice, particularly the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, to which Australia is a signatory. Fourth, it would reduce organised crime profitability. And fifth, it would create a clear evidentiary test where importers must demonstrate legitimate use and a user location and compliance history before importation.</para>
<para>The current customs regulations already control importation of other dual-use production equipment, such as tablet presses and encapsulators. Therefore there is a clear legislative precedent for the prohibited imports regulations to control goods that enable illicit production, and tobacco manufacturing machinery fits that model.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Mackellar for the very constructive discussions we've had. It is a very well-intentioned amendment, and I appreciate where it came from. The government is not able to support it, and I'll put on the record, in reasonably succinct form, the reasons.</para>
<para>Tobacco manufacturing equipment is inherently multipurpose. It's also used to make a wide range of pharmaceutical products, food and beverage, as well as chemical processing. If members are deeply interested or fascinated to learn more, they're of course very welcome to come and have a separate conversation, where we could talk about granulation and compression of pharmaceuticals, powder dosing and filling of pharmaceuticals, and the extraction of pharmaceuticals, all of which occurs on the same basic machinery. Or we could talk about the conditioning and thermal drying of food and beverage products, the mixing and blending of food and beverage products, industrial extraction of food and beverage products, or of course the grinding and slicing or liquid spraying as part of chemical processing. It's all the same basic equipment.</para>
<para>I appreciate the comparator and the discussions we've had with respect to the analogy, if you like, of tablet presses, which are regulated. The very firm and clear advice from the Australian Border Force is to not include tobacco manufacturing equipment in a border control framework. Their advice is that the comparator—and we've had a look through it again, and there's detail if any members are interested to talk about it later—is not the same, given the scope of uses across pharmaceuticals, agriculture, and food and beverage. Tablet presses are controlled, as you note, under the regulations. Importation is prohibited unless a permit is granted. Control is targeted to equipment but not parts, and that's a further complication. Legitimate industries can access equipment and require a permit. But the comparison just doesn't sit in a practical level with the broad types of multipurpose equipment detailed above that large swathes of legitimate industries need to import for their product.</para>
<para>All these things, then, are a question of cost and benefit. To set up such a regulatory regime would be a more significant diversion of Border Force's resources than perhaps is appreciated, given the wide range of machinery. And right now I think the priority, which I accept, for the Australian Border Force in their operational advice is not to divert those resources away from inspecting containers at the border.</para>
<para>I'll just put on the record the appreciation of the work they've done over the last six to 12 months. They've had record levels of seizures at the border. Campaign Printwall, now ongoing Operation Printwall, between December and March seized more than a kilotonne of illegal tobacco. They had a record month in March, a record week in March, a record month in April and a record week in April. And I think in the circumstances we should listen to their advice and not divert those resources into a complex regulatory regime for which the cost-benefit doesn't stack up.</para>
<para>The final point I'd make is that my office has engaged with the Cancer Council on this and taken them through it. I don't want to verbal them, but I think there's broad understanding and acceptance about the posture at the moment. But I thank the member for Mackellar as well as her fellow doctor sitting next to her, the member for Kooyong, for your genuine interest in this topic.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
<para>Bill agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>106</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7507" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report from Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>106</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [17:20]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>38</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aldred, M. R. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Batt, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chaffey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Farley, D.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                  <name>Kennedy, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Penfold, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Rebello, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Venning, T. H.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>80</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.<br />Bill agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>108</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THISTLETHWAITE</name>
    <name.id>182468</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingsford Smith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7501" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>108</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JARRETT</name>
    <name.id>298574</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to speak about something that goes to the heart of what Labor governments have always stood for: the idea that where you start in life does not determine where you finish—and few things have more power to change the course of a person's life than education. That's why the Albanese Labor government has introduced this bill, the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. It's not simply another piece of legislation about university administration or funding formulas. At its core, it's about opportunity, it's about fairness and it's about equality. Every person who wants to go to university should be able to do so, and every person should have the opportunity to set themselves up for the future and be what they want to be.</para>
<para>This bill is also about the future of our nation. It's about preparing Australia for the jobs and the challenges of the decades ahead. The Universities Accord identifies enormous challenges for our country. By 2050, Australia is expected to need a workforce where around 80 per cent of working-age Australians have a tertiary education, either through university or through vocational education and training. We can't simply achieve this by asking the same people who have traditionally gone to university to keep going. We have to widen the doors. We have to reach Australians who have historically been underrepresented in higher education—people from low-income families, people from regional and remote Australia, First Nations people, people with disabilities and Australians who might be the first person in their family to ever walk onto a university campus—because talent is not concentrated in wealthy suburbs, intelligence is not determined by postcodes and ambition does not disappear when you cross the Great Dividing Range. Talent exists everywhere; it's opportunity that does not, and this bill is about changing that.</para>
<para>Today, close to half of Australians in their 30s have a university degree. But, as Education Minister Jason Clare pointed out, university attainment of young people from poorer families or regional Australia is roughly half the rate we see across the broader population, and it falls even further in various parts of the bush. That should concern all of us, because, when a capable young Australian misses out on an education simply because of circumstances, that is not only a loss for that individual; it is a loss for Australia. That person could have become a nurse, a teacher, an engineer, a scientist, a social worker, an accountant, a doctor or perhaps the first person in their family to graduate from university and change the expectations of the generation that follows them. That is the extraordinary thing about education—the benefits don't stop with the person receiving it. Education changes families, education changes communities, and ultimately it changes countries.</para>
<para>One of the central reforms in this bill is the creation of a new managed growth funding system to not only support more university places but ensure those places are directed towards Australians and communities where they're needed the most. Under the legislation, the Minister for Education will establish a total allocation pool, effectively determining the overall number of fully funded Commonwealth supported places available each year, and the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, will then be responsible for the allocation of places.</para>
<para>From 2027—that's just next year—there are expected to be around 16,000 additional fully funded Commonwealth supported places each year, increasing to around 19,000 additional places in 2030. Over the next decade, the government expects the system to support approximately 230,000 additional commencing university students. Think about what that represents—230,000 Australians, 230,000 opportunities, 230,000 people who may become teachers, nurses, engineers, health professionals, researchers, innovators and the skilled workers Australia will depend on. That is nation-building.</para>
<para>This reform matters also enormously for regional Australia. For someone growing up in Brisbane, Sydney or Melbourne, university may be relatively accessible. There may even be several universities within commuting distance. You might live with your parents. You might keep your existing job. You might already know people who went to university or who will go with you. Imagine being 18 years old in a small regional community. The nearest university could be hundreds of kilometres away. University means leaving your family, finding somewhere to live, paying rent, finding work, paying transport costs and trying to study at the same time. When you think about it, for those students, the question is not only whether they are smart enough to go to university; it's also whether they can actually afford to do it? That's a fundamentally different problem. That's why we're expanding university participation and saying it cannot simply be about creating places. We also have to give students the support they need to succeed and thrive.</para>
<para>That brings me to the second major reform contained in this legislation, needs based funding. The principle is familiar to anyone who understands Labor's approach to education. Different students have different needs, and educating students facing greater barriers can require additional resources. The legislation therefore embeds needs based funding within the core university funding system, providing additional support associated with students from disadvantaged backgrounds, First Nation students and students studying at regional campuses. That matters because getting someone through university gates is really only half the job. We want them to graduate. A student who is the first person in their family to attend university may need different support from somebody whose parents and grandparents went to university. A student moving hundreds of kilometres from a regional community may face different pressures. A student juggling study with 20 or 30 hours of paid work because their family cannot financially support them faces different challenges again. Giving everybody exactly the same thing doesn't mean equity. Equity means recognising these differing needs and giving them the support they need.</para>
<para>These reforms also represent a significant investment in the future of our university system. The government estimates that the changes will deliver an additional $3.6 billion in university funding over the next decade, and that investment matters. What matters even more is what we receive in return—more Australians educated, more skills in our economy, more graduates entering essential professions, greater participation in regional communities, greater participation for disadvantaged Australians and First Nations people, and ultimately a stronger, more productive country. Education should never, ever be viewed as an expense. It's an investment. It's an investment in productivity. It's an investment in families and in social mobility. It's an investment in innovation and an investment in Australia's future. This is part of the bigger Labor reform agenda.</para>
<para>It's also important to recognise that this bill does not exist in isolation. It forms part of the Albanese government's broader response to the Australian Universities Accord, one of the most significant reviews of Australia's higher education sector in decades. In fact, this is the seventh piece of legislation introduced by the Albanese Labor government to implement the accord. The accord is attempting to answer a very big question: what sort of education system does Australia need for its future and for the next generation?</para>
<para>Our economy is changing and technology is changing. Artificial intelligence is changing workplaces, the energy transition is creating new industries, our population is ageing, demand for health care is increasing, and Australia needs more skilled workers across the vast parts of our economy. We need nurses. We need teachers, engineers, doctors and allied health professionals, scientists, technology specialists, construction workers and skilled vocational workers. Meeting these challenges requires both university and TAFE. Frankly, we should never have to have a debate about university versus vocational education. They're both equally important, and Australia needs both. Labor believes that both should provide genuine pathways to secure and meaningful work.</para>
<para>There is also something deeply Labor about these reforms, because widening access to education has been part of Labor's story for generations—since inception, basically. Labor understands that education is one of the most powerful forms of economic policy available to government. Give someone access to education and you give them something much more valuable than a temporary advantage—you give them skills, you give them knowledge, you give them choices, you give them independence, and you give them the ability to build their own future.</para>
<para>For generations of working Australians, university was where someone else's children went, but that changed a long time ago, and governments played a huge role in changing that. Our responsibility now is to make sure the next generation of Australians get the opportunity to do what they want to do. A child growing up in Logan, Ipswich, Townsville, Cairns, Rockhampton or even regional Queensland should be able to dream just as big as a child growing up in the wealthier parts of Sydney or Melbourne. Their parents' income should not determine the size of their ambition. Their postcode should not determine their potential, and whether their parents went to university should not determine whether they believe university is somewhere they belong.</para>
<para>There's another important element of these reforms. We should not judge success simply by how many students enrol. We should judge success by how many students succeed. There is little value in encouraging a disadvantaged student to begin a degree if we abandon them once they arrive. So universities have a responsibility, too. They need to provide academic support, and they need to provide appropriate services. They need to identify students who are struggling before those students disappear from the system. They need to create environments where students from different backgrounds can genuinely feel that they belong. That's why linking growth with needs based support is so important—so that we're not simply opening the door, we're helping people walk through it and reach the other side.</para>
<para>Lastly, this bill represents a shift to a more strategically managed university system, with better sharing of information to support outcomes and better inform the commission's work. There is a powerful economic argument for these reforms, as I said earlier. Australia's future prosperity increasingly depends on knowledge and skills. We cannot compete internationally simply by working longer hours. We need to work smarter. We need productivity growth. We need innovation. We need workers with the skills required by a modern economy. That means investing in people and investing in human capital.</para>
<para>When Australia educates another nurse, we strengthen our health system. When we educate another teacher, we strengthen our schools. When we educate an engineer, we increase our capacity to build infrastructure and develop new industries. When we educate another scientist or researcher, we increase Australia's capacity to innovate. And when someone from a disadvantaged family becomes the first in their family to graduate from university, as I was, we potentially change the economic trajectory of that family for generations. That's why education policy is good economic policy.</para>
<para>But, ultimately, there's an even more simple reason to support this legislation: it's fair. Australians believe in a fair go—not a guarantee that everyone will achieve exactly the same outcome or result, and not a promise that success will come without effort, but belief that everyone deserves an opportunity to try. If you work hard at school and earn the marks required for university, your family's bank balance should not be the thing that stops you from going there. If you grow up in regional Queensland, distance should not automatically close the door. If nobody in your family has attended university before, you should still be able to become the first. That is what social mobility looks like, and that is the Australia that Labor should always fight for.</para>
<para>The universities accord makes clear Australia will need significantly more people with tertiary qualifications in the decades ahead, and this bill is an important part of meeting that challenge. It creates a new managed growth fund, it expands the number of places, it provides support to around 230,000 additional students, it embeds needs based funding and it represents approximately $3.6 billion in additional investment.</para>
<para>But behind those numbers are people: a kid from Logan, a young woman from regional Queensland, a First Nations student who wants to become a teacher, a mature-age worker who wants to start over again or a migrant who's intent on making things better for their family. These are reasons that matter, and this is why Australia cannot afford to waste talent. Your postcode should not determine your potential, your parents' income should not determine your ambition and your background should never determine whether the doors of education are open to you. The great promise of education is that it allows people to build lives bigger than the circumstances into which they were born, and our job is to make sure that promise belongs to everyone. That's what opening the doors of opportunity means, and that's what these reforms are about. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today in support of the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. This bill is the next step in the Albanese Labor government's ambition for an educated Australia. We're putting in place the necessary reforms to set our tertiary education system up to deliver on Australia's future skills needs. These reforms are practical, they're funded and they are long overdue.</para>
<para>In February 2024, the government released the final report of the Australian Universities Accord. The accord provides the blueprint for higher education reform over the next 20 years. At the heart of the accord is an ambitious goal: that, by 2050, 80 per cent of Australia's workforce will hold a certificate, diploma or degree. It's a big target, and it's meant to be, because meeting Australia's future skills needs in the decades ahead means having more students at TAFE and more people at university. But the only way to achieve this is by breaking down the barriers that stop so many young people from getting to university. Talent is everywhere; it's opportunity that's not.</para>
<para>Canberra is a university town, home to more universities than any other electorate in Australia. We've got the Australian National University, the University of Canberra, and campuses of the University of New South Wales, the Australian Catholic University and Charles Sturt University within my electorate. And we are not standing still: the University of New South Wales is also currently constructing their new Reid campus, near the Civic CBD, which is slated for completion in 2028.</para>
<para>The Canberra electorate is highly educated, with around 66,000 residents—or 53 per cent—having a bachelor's degree or higher. A further 8,200 residents, or nearly seven per cent, have a certificate level III or IV qualification. The education and training sector is the third biggest employer in my electorate, providing jobs for over 8,600 residents, and, as at the 2021 census, my constituents included over 21,800 tertiary students.</para>
<para>Even so, there is some way to go and still plenty of work to do before my electorate—and Australia—reaches the accord's important 2050 goal. Since 2024, the Albanese Labor government has already implemented more than 30 of the accord's 47 recommendations in full or in part. We have made HECS better and fairer by cutting 20 per cent off HECS debts, capping indexation of HECS debts to the lower of the consumer price index and the wage price index, moving to a marginal repayment system and raising the minimum repayment threshold. These reforms mean that graduates keep more of their pay before their loan repayments even begin.</para>
<para>We've also introduced paid prac for the first time, for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students. This has been done in recognition of the fact that unpaid placements have, for too long, locked out students who cannot afford to work for free while completing the very training this country needs them to complete. Recently, we have expanded this excellent scheme to pharmacy and allied health students. I was really pleased to have the opportunity to speak with many of these students at the recent market day at the University of Canberra about what it was going to mean for them and how much easier it would make it for them to take on those prac placements and also to, as one student put it, be more adventurous in the opportunities that they took up through those placements.</para>
<para>We have also doubled the number of university study hubs by establishing 20 new regional university study hubs and 14 suburban university study hubs. University study hubs break down barriers to tertiary study by making it easier for students to access learning resources and support services, engage with other students and succeed in their higher education journey. We have increased the number of free university bridging courses, giving people a genuine second chance to gain entry to a university and gain tertiary qualifications. We've introduced the National Student Ombudsman and a national code to prevent and respond to gender based violence, because a university education should never come at the cost of a student's safety. We have established the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, as the steward of the entire tertiary education system, giving our country, for the first time, an organisation whose sole purpose is to plan for Australia's future skill needs.</para>
<para>As the Minister for Education has said, this bill implements two more key changes recommended by the accord. The accord recommended the adoption of a new funding model for higher education, one planned and managed by ATEC through mission based compacts with individual institutions. It also recommended increasing the number of higher education students from underrepresented backgrounds, matched by a genuine focus on the success of those students, not merely their enrolment.</para>
<para>This bill will help more people from financially disadvantaged families, the regions and the bush to get into university. In simple terms, if you get the marks and you've got what it takes, you will get a place—a Commonwealth supported place. In other words, places for these students will effectively now be uncapped. It also formalises the role of ATEC in allocating Commonwealth supported places for higher education courses to higher education providers and to international student places where the minister makes a determination. The bill will see an additional $3.6 billion of Australian government investment in the higher education funding system over the next 10 years. This will increase the number of students at university to meet Australia's future skills needs.</para>
<para>There is still work to do, however. Because of the unique nature of the ACT, there is not a single postcode that is currently classified as being of low socioeconomic status. This is because we have a mixture of housing types in each and every suburb, with most suburbs including public housing. This is one of the things that make our city such an inclusive place and a wonderful place to live. But, with our relatively high average incomes and low unemployment, the ACT is also a really difficult place to be on a lower income or to be poor. It is not the case that disadvantage and these challenges don't exist in our city—they absolutely do—but, with the way the data currently classifies suburbs and postcodes, this does not show up. This, in turn, disadvantages our universities in the way that funding is allocated to them.</para>
<para>I have raised this issue with the minister, and I'm hoping that we might be able to address this issue. I'll continue to advocate for my community to ensure that people in the ACT, particularly in my electorate, are not disadvantaged by these rules and that our universities can continue to build on their important role in educating students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.</para>
<para>I also want to take this opportunity to speak about the disastrous Jobs-ready Graduates Package introduced by the Morrison government, which is encumbering university students with enormous levels of debt and discouraging students from taking on a range of really important degrees, including those in the humanities. When I attended university with the assistance of HECS and paid it back, it was, in hindsight, a relatively modest debt to the government, and it was paid back relatively quickly. It wasn't a huge impost on my life or the lives of those that had these debts at that time. Now, students come to me telling us their stories of absolutely enormous debts and the impact this is having on them as they finish their degrees, move into the workforce and try to plan for other things that they might want to be doing, like investing in a home, starting a family et cetera. It was never the intention of the HECS to be like that, and I hope that this is something that our government can address as soon as possible. The sooner we get rid of that job-ready graduates program, the better it will be for young Australians and those wanting to take on a university education.</para>
<para>Whenever I talk about breaking down the barriers for people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds to get into university, I think it's important that we don't ignore the costs of living that students face, particularly when they move from a regional area or a remote area to a capital city like Canberra, where things are expensive—rent and food. And this is actually a great barrier that people face. I think that it would be great if we could look at the Youth Allowance payment and have a bit of a rethink about that as to how it can be a more meaningful support to young people who are trying to live away from home a lot of the time—or even those living at home; it doesn't mean that it's not a huge cost for them and their families to support them through that. I think that this is one of the barriers that also need to be looked at for young people, if we really want to get more people having access to tertiary education.</para>
<para>Under Labor, there are more Australians at university today than we have ever had before, and it is going to continue to grow. Next year, there will be 16,000 more places for more students in the system. Another 16,000 places will be added each year in 2028 and 2029, and in 2030 this will increase to 19,000 additional fully funded Commonwealth supported places. Our changes are expected to result in an extra 230,000 commencing domestic students at university over the next decade. This is a wonderful thing. In particular, this bill will support more students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses to participate and, importantly, to succeed at university. As the CEO of Universities Australia, Luke Sheehy said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">"Australia needs more university-educated workers, not fewer …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"That means opening the door to university for more Australians, no matter their postcode, background or bank balance.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"More opportunity is good for students, good for communities and good for the economy.</para></quote>
<para>…   …   …</para>
<quote><para class="block">"This bill represents a major change to how student places are funded, allocated and supported. The ambition is right …</para></quote>
<para>The bill enacts our government's commitment to the accord through a new funding system. It will embed a new managed-growth funding system and establish demand driven, needs based funding to support students from underrepresented backgrounds to access and succeed at university. We'll also formalise the role of the ATEC in allocating Commonwealth supported places. The new managed-growth funding system will effectively uncap the number of places for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds in regional areas. The new system will address existing issues in the higher education funding system and will better align Commonwealth funding with enrolments. Higher education providers will be supported to transition to the new funding system. Similar to Gonski funding for schools, the more students a university has that meet the criteria, the more funding they will receive to help these students to participate and succeed at university. And this is why it's important that the particular situation of the ACT is able to be accounted for in that funding model.</para>
<para>This bill sets the base equity amount at $1,535 and the base regional amount at $1,398. This is more than two times the average amount provided to universities per student last year, which was as little as $600 under similar previous programs. Universities will be able to direct this extra funding towards things like tutoring, mentoring and other academic supports; direct financial assistance such as scholarships and grants; and offsetting the higher costs of campuses in regional and remote areas.</para>
<para>This bill does not stand alone. It builds on a substantial suite of reforms this government has already delivered. Labor is investing in education at every stage of life, helping Australians learn, gain skills and succeed. We have put in place a three-day guarantee for early education. The historic Better and Fairer Schools Agreement is the biggest new investment by an Australian government in public education ever, the first time that all of our public schools have been fully funded to the Schooling Resource Standard. That is an incredible achievement and one I talk about at every opportunity.</para>
<para>Education is so critical to Australia's future in a global economy, which is why this bill is so important. It will mean more Australians from every background and from every part of our country getting the chance to study at TAFE and at university and succeeding once they get there. Labor is the party of education. Labor is the party of opportunity. Labor is putting in place the necessary reforms to future-proof Australia's tertiary education sector, and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR</name>
    <name.id>315618</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. This bill is a blueprint for the future of higher education in this country. It is about setting up our kids for a future as big as their ambition, and it's about setting up our universities so they can foster our best and brightest. And, therefore, it is about making our country as smart and strong as possible as it can be. That is what higher education is about. It's about giving people the tools they need to participate fully in society. Of course, universities are only part of that picture; TAFE is another essential piece of the puzzle, giving people different pathways, different options and different chances to succeed.</para>
<para>But today we are speaking about universities, and I want to frame this debate in the context of Barton, the community that I'm so proud to represent. People come to Barton because of opportunity. We sit just outside the centre of Sydney. We have great train lines and buses that allow people to get to work, school and university. And, if you live in Kogarah, Wolli Creek, Rockdale, Hurstville, Arncliffe, Bexley or the surrounding suburbs, you are within reach of some of the best higher education institutions in this country. You can get to the University of New South Wales, which I know is the university of choice for many locals in the St George area. You can get to the University of Sydney, which I did after graduating from Danebank in Hurstville. You can get to the University of Technology Sydney, to which I also went back to study law after completing my science degree and deciding to change my career.</para>
<para>That is the power of higher education. It does not just open the door; it opens many doors at different points in our lives. Because of Barton's proximity to these institutions, I meet so many young people who are thinking about university, preparing for university or already studying there. For many of them, university is not just for their own dream; it's their parents dream too. It is something their families have worked for, saved for and also sacrificed for. Families move to our area because they want their children to have every possible chance. They want them to go to good schools, be surrounded by opportunity and believe the future is open to them. In Barton we are blessed with really incredible schools. I think of Sydney Technical High School, Beverly Hills Girls High School, Kingsgrove High School, Kingsgrove North High School, Blakehurst High School, Marist Catholic College Kogarah, St Mary's and St Mina's Coptic Orthodox College, St Ursula's College, Bethany Catholic College Hurstville, St George Girls High School, Kogarah High School, Bayside High School and so many others just outside my boundaries. These are schools filled with students who are so bright, ambitious and ready to make their mark in the world.</para>
<para>And that is what this country should be about. There are some in this parliament—some in the other place—who like to talk a lot about Australian values. They talk about who belongs, who gets to contribute and what Australia should actually look like. But to me, Australian values are very clear: they are aspiration, hard work, sacrifice and the belief that the next generation should have more opportunities than the one before it. And Barton is full of that aspiration. It is aspiration of parents who came here to give their kids a better chance than they had. It is families working long hours, taking extra shifts, running small businesses commuting across the city, doing everything they can to make sure their children can stand on stronger ground. It is a whole family carrying hope for the future together. And it's because of this aspiration that I want to say to every kid in Barton: your postcode should not limit your future, your parents' income should not decide your future, and your background should never be treated as a barrier to your future.</para>
<para>For many families in my electorate, that future includes university. So, when I think about this bill, I think about the year 12 students I speak to across my electorate—the students studying hard, sitting exams, working part time and wondering whether university is really within reach. They want to know that, if they go to university, they will not be saddled with a debt that follows them around for the rest of their lives. They want higher education to help them move forward and not hold them back. A university degree should be a doorway, not a debt sentence.</para>
<para>I also think about the students already at university. They want to know that, when they graduate, they will step into a workforce that has a place for them. They are worried about the future of work. They're worried about whether artificial intelligence will wipe out entry-level jobs. They are worried that the skills they have spent years learning may not actually match to the economy they graduate into. I hear that concern. Young people are not imagining it. They are looking at a changing world and asking whether the systems around them are keeping up.</para>
<para>Young people are not asking for a free ride. They're asking for a fair shot. They're asking whether this country still believes that if you work hard, you study hard and you back yourself there will be a place for you. I want those students to know that when I come into this place, when I sit in the caucus, when I sit in committee and when I look at legislation and policy I'm thinking about them. I'm thinking about the country they will inherit, the jobs they will do, the communities they will serve and the contribution they will make.</para>
<para>Our job in this parliament is not just to manage the present; it is about preparing for the future. That means making higher education fairer. It means making sure university is not reserved for those whose families can already afford it. It means making sure students who work hard, dream big and want to contribute to this country have a real chance to do so.</para>
<para>Let's look at this bill and see what it actually does. The main thing this bill does is introduce a new funding system. This is demand driven, needs based funding to support students from underrepresented backgrounds to get into university and stay at university and succeed once they are there. I think Minister Clare described it best when he called it Gonski but for universities. That means when a university enrols more students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and regional students it will receive more funding to support them—simple as that. This matters.</para>
<para>Getting into university is only the first step. We also have to make sure students have the support they need to finish it. This funding will give universities additional resources for tutoring, mentoring, academic support, scholarships and emergency financial assistance. For some students, that support might be the difference between actually finishing their degree and dropping out. It might be the difference between buying textbooks, paying rent, getting to campus, taking on a placement or keeping going when things really get hard. Under these changes, that funding will be about double what universities would previously receive per student, and that's a serious investment in young people, fairness and Australia's future.</para>
<para>These changes flow from the universities accord process, a 12-month review of the higher education sector. That review found:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The current … model does not provide for sufficient growth in enrolments to meet the nation's skills needs, with growth occurring in unplanned, unmanaged and under-funded ways that can have unintended consequences for the breadth and quality of courses.</para></quote>
<para>That should concern all of us. It tells us that the system is not properly set up to produce the graduates our country needs. Growth has been happening in a way that is not planned properly, managed properly or funded properly. It also tells us too many students are being pushed into a system that does not always set them up for success. Too many students are taking on debt for courses that may not lead them where they need to go.</para>
<para>Too many students with the marks, ability and work ethic are still missing out because they do not come from wealthy families or communities where university has always felt like a given. That's not good enough. Talent is not confined to one postcode. Intelligence is not confined to one income bracket. Ambition is not confined to one kind of family. There are brilliant kids in Barton and right across this country who deserve every chance to get into the course they have earned, study the skills our country needs and build the future they are working so hard for. That is why we are introducing this legislation.</para>
<para>Under this bill, the minister will be able to amend the total allocation pool determination, either on their own initiative or following a request from the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, in response to demand from equity cohorts. That sounds a bit technical, but what it means is quite practical. It means the system can respond when more students from underrepresented backgrounds want to study. It means universities will be resourced to support them. It means there will be enough places for eligible students from equity backgrounds to participate. In plain English, students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students from regional areas will have a fairer chance to get into courses they have earned their place in. That is what opening the doors of opportunity actually means. It's not telling young people to work hard and then leaving the door half shut. It's making sure that, when they do work hard, there is a real place for them on the other side.</para>
<para>The bill will also give the minister greater flexibility to determine different kinds of courses as demand-driven higher education courses in order to respond to emerging government priorities. For example, the minister may choose to classify courses such as nursing or education as demand-driven courses to support more enrolments where the workforce need is clear. Those needs are clear. We need nurses, teachers, social workers and engineers. We need people with the skills to care for our community, build our future, strengthen our economy and respond to the challenges that are coming at us.</para>
<para>This bill is not just about university places; it's about making sure Australia has the workforce it needs. It's about saying to a young person in Barton, 'If you want to become a nurse, teacher, lawyer, scientist, social worker, engineer or anything else this country needs then your background should not be the thing that stops you.' All of this means we are effectively uncapping the number of places for students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds and regional areas. It means making sure our young people are studying the subjects and learning the skills they need to build good lives, support their families and contribute to this country.</para>
<para>We expect these changes will result in an extra 230,000 Australian students at our universities over the next decade. That is 230,000 more people whose talents this country cannot afford to waste. This is on top of the work this government has already done through the Australian Universities Accord. We have wiped 20 per cent off student debts. We've capped HECS indexation to the lower of CPI and WPI. We have introduced paid pracs for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students. We have increased the number of free university-ready courses. We are doubling the number of university study hubs. That's because this government has a vision for the future, and it's not some vague consultation thought-bubble. It is much simpler than that. It is trusting the talent of our kids. It's giving people a fair go. It's rewarding aspiration. It's making sure that every child in every community has the chance to build a life as big as their ambition.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SOON</name>
    <name.id>298618</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Prior to being a parliamentarian, I was a different type of public servant. I spent a great deal of my career working in education policy, looking at how education systems, both in Australia and overseas, can be more effective and provide better outcomes for students. My time in this field showed me that there is much government can do in order to improve our education system from an efficiency and effectiveness perspective. However, if a situation persists where students are unable to meaningfully access the education system, government must legislate in order to ensure that the transformational power of education is an opportunity available to all.</para>
<para>The government released the final report of the Australian Universities Accord in February 2024. The universities accord is a blueprint for higher education reform over the next 20 years, and the government has made significant progress in its implementation.</para>
<para>So far, this Labor government has implemented 30 of the accord's 47 recommendations in part or in full. As promised, the first piece of legislation passed by this parliament cut the HECS debts of hundreds of thousands of Australians by 20 per cent, along with changes to cap indexation, moving to a marginal repayment system and raising the minimum threshold to make the HECS system fairer on students and graduates. We introduced the Commonwealth paid prac payment for teaching nursing, midwifery and social work students, ensuring that students studying some of the most in-demand professions do not have to choose between paying their bills and completing their mandatory practical training. We've seen the results of the paid prac payment and, as was announced a few weeks ago, we're expanding it to students studying to be paramedics, pharmacists, psychologists and seven more in-demand allied health professions. This expansion represents a $143 million investment in our health workforce, ensuring that we can continue to train local talent for in-demand professions in our healthcare system.</para>
<para>It was my pleasure to welcome the Minister for Health and Ageing to the suburb of Mortdale in my electorate two weeks ago to meet with local speech pathologists and occupational therapists. While all of the professionals we met spoke about the value of their practical training, they also reflected that it was a significant challenge for them to give up existing work in order to support themselves.</para>
<para>The recommendations also included making sure that there were proper stewards of our higher education system and a process to resolve student complaints when they call out the behaviour of higher education providers. This government has established the Australian Tertiary Education Commission through legislation which passed the house earlier this year and came into effect in April. The commission will help deliver reforms needed to ensure the higher education system is working in the national interest, as well as monitor the performance of providers and provide advice to government on appropriate policy settings for our country.</para>
<para>What the Universities Accord made particularly clear is that our higher education system needs reform urgently to ensure it continues to deliver for students and our economy. The accord says clearly that, over the next decade, the number of people in the workforce with a certificate, a diploma or a degree will need to grow to 80 per cent. It means more students at universities and TAFE across our country if we are to meet Australia's growing skills need. This legislation is the latest step in the government's response to make sure we can address those needs.</para>
<para>The accord recommended a new funding model for higher education, planned and managed through the ATEC. It also recommended increasing the number of students, as my colleague the member for Barton outlined earlier, from underrepresented backgrounds and a focus on ensuring their success.</para>
<para>In short, this legislation does three things. It embeds the new, managed-growth funding system to support growth in domestic students, including those from low-socioeconomic, regional and remote backgrounds. It establishes demand driven, needs based funding to support students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses. It also formalises the role of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission in allocating Commonwealth supported places for higher education courses to providers and international students where the minister makes a determination. As a result, the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 enacts government's commitment of an additional $3.6 billion in the higher education system over the medium term and is projected to see 230,000 extra domestic students commence university over the next decade.</para>
<para>The House Standing Committee on Education is currently conducting an inquiry into the factors driving educational attainment, examining what drives differences in outcomes across different demographics. While the inquiry will seek to provide clarity on what creates these disparities in the education space, what can't be questioned is that they are there. As the minister pointed out when he moved the second reading, close to 50 per cent of Australians in their 30s have a university degree, but it is significantly lower for people who come from a lower socioeconomic background or from the regions and lower still for people from rural or remote areas. It is a disparity that we need to change, not just because we need more people who have tertiary education but also as a matter of fairness, because there are talented young people everywhere, all over our country, who come from all different backgrounds.</para>
<para>The new managed growth fund system will effectively uncap the number of places for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and regional areas. These changes sit alongside the network of suburban and regional study hubs for university students that this government has doubled, bringing down the barriers to tertiary education for students in the outer suburbs, in regional and remote areas of our country. They provide a place for students to study and access IT equipment as well as advice on career pathways, employment, study options and their general wellbeing—all the things that students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds and in the big cities often have easy access to. These centres are a game changer, and the big winners are our regional communities. Of the 70 centres in the network, 55 are in regional or remote Australia. According to the Department for Education Statistics, they have supported nearly 21,000 students.</para>
<para>The demand-driven, needs based funding model will provide extra funding to support students who come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses. Under this new arrangement, the amount of funding per student will more than double in some cases. Similarly to the Gonski model for schools, the more students a university has that meet these criteria, the more funding the university will receive to help these students participate and succeed.</para>
<para>The bill before the House sets the base equity amount at $1,535 and the base regional amount at $1,398, which is more than double the average amount provided last year. In some cases, under previous comparable funding programs it was as little as $600. Universities will be able to put this funding towards academic support programs such as tutoring and mentoring, direct financial assistance in the form of grants or scholarships, or offsetting of the higher cost of campuses in regional and remote areas. We know that students from the cohorts this bill seeks to help are less likely to start a university degree. They are also less likely to finish it, with data indicating they are twice as likely to drop out after their first year. This is why needs based funding is so important. It is a real reform to ensure that students who, coming out of school, have the grades to get into university have the supports to finish their degrees.</para>
<para>Additionally, the bill sets out and formalises some procedural elements, including a framework for the ATEC to exercise its existing powers to allocate international student places where the Minister for Education makes an international allocation pool determination. The bill also makes some technical amendments to modernise information sharing between the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency—the regulator—and ATEC to inform their work as needed and appropriate.</para>
<para>I also feel compelled to challenge one of the points that the member for Berowra made in his contribution to the House. One of the central arguments he made was his idea that competition, deregulation and independence would be the best way forward for the university sector. Core to that was the notion that we should let the university sector operate like other marketplaces and encourage competition. It has to be said, though, letting universities operate like businesses, rather than educational institutions, in a market that is inherently uneven or unequal has unfortunately been part of the problem. Even the father of classical economics, Adam Smith, argued that education should not be left to the market.</para>
<para>Some universities have access to a larger pool of potential students than others. Some universities have reputations built over decades of prestige that make them inherently more attractive to potential students. The need to meet commercial pressures in such an environment is what has driven an overreliance on certain revenue streams, such as international students, that the government has had to correct. In some circumstances it has also predicated a drop in the quality of education delivered and the sort of conduct uncovered by inquiries into university governance, like the one my friend Dr Sarah Kaine is chairing in the New South Wales parliament.</para>
<para>Indeed, higher education is not just any good or service. Given the level of tertiary qualified students our economy is going to need, it is becoming more and more essential. Pursuing purer competition and deregulation in the university sector would only usher in a new era of problems that Australian students have had enough of, as well as the sort of consolidation that reduces access in the name of commercial performance.</para>
<para>This legislation is important. Too many young people in this country face barriers to higher education on the basis of things that they cannot control. We cannot go on telling young people that they should have aspirations for their future, before leaving them at the mercy of a system that gets in the way of them reaching that potential, not least of all because as a country we cannot afford the underlying cost of talented young people not getting a chance to succeed on the basis of where they live or how much their parents earn.</para>
<para>This legislation before the House will help make our higher education sector fairer. It will help build a sector where growth is planned, giving providers the certainty to plan for the future; where funding responds to the needs of students, lowering the barriers that prevent educational attainment and success; and where the opportunity to access the transformational power of education is not rationed for some while being plentiful for others but is available to all Australians, including in my electorate of Banks and in regional remote areas across our great country.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MONCRIEFF</name>
    <name.id>316540</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>'Learning is the only thing the mind never exhausts, never fears and never regrets.' Those words, attributed to the great polymath Leonardo da Vinci, speak to a timeless truth. Education is the great equaliser and enabler. It is the single most powerful driver of social mobility and the ladder by which young people from suburbs like those in my home of southern Sydney can build a better life for themselves, their families and their communities.</para>
<para>The democratisation of education increases the supply of innovative and interested minds. In turn, increased education makes for a more exciting society. That is why education is a core value of the Australian Labor Party. It empowers workers, grows the stock of human capital, promotes economic mobility and gives people the skills and confidence to withstand powerful shocks. As the party of growth and security, Labor will always work to improve higher education and expand its accessibility to all.</para>
<para>At the start of 2024, our government released the final report of the Australian Universities Accord. It provides a roadmap for reforming higher education to expand access and opportunity well into the future. The Albanese Labor government has already improved the fairness of HECS by cutting 20 per cent off every student loan, capping indexation, moving to a marginal repayment system and raising the minimum repayment threshold. That means billions of dollars in debt has been wiped out for over three million Australians, including 18,226 students in my electorate with a HECS debt and 589 with a VET loan. Now, if wages fail to rise faster than inflation, indexation will be capped to the lower of the CPI or the wage price index, ensuring that student loans no longer outpace students' purchasing power. We've raised the minimum repayment threshold from $54,435 to $67,000 and introduced a marginal repayment system. Under the previous repayment structure, earning $1 over the threshold required a percentage payment on your entire income, acting as a high effective marginal tax rate and disincentivising work. Now, repayments only apply to income earned above the threshold.</para>
<para>We have introduced the National Student Ombudsman and National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence. Academic success depends on an environment where students feel safe, respected and supported. Following persistent advocacy regarding safety failures across university campuses, our government has established the National Student Ombudsman, a single entry body that can investigate student complaints spanning academic disputes, administrative fairness and welfare concerns. Higher education institutions must also comply with new mandatory standards to address gender based violence. Student safety is not an optional campus policy. That's why the national higher education code now requires providers to maintain secure student accommodation, establish trauma informed support services and publish de-identified reporting data, with compliance overseen by the Department of Education. We have made Commonwealth supported places available to all First Nations students with the marks to get in, and we have established the Australian Tertiary Education Commission as a steward of the tertiary education system.</para>
<para>Years ago I had the privilege of being able to study economics and finance at the University of Wollongong's southern Sydney, now Sutherland, campus. Like so many young people growing up in the shire and in Sydney's southern suburbs broadly, I faced the daily calculus that every tertiary student must grapple with—long commutes, the pressures of working, paying for textbooks and transport, and the challenges of navigating studies. It was just as important as what I was able to learn in the lecture theatre where I studied. Having access to a local university campus, right in Sutherland and Loftus, meant that I was able to access high quality tertiary education without the barriers of long hours of commuting between home, work and university. It meant that I could stay connected to the community that I grew up in, remain employed in the local area and focus on my studies without the kind of geographic and financial barriers that many students face. The skills and experience I gained through my studies went on to inform and equip me for my work in the finance sector and subsequently to my involvement in government and arrival in this place. This has instilled in me the deep understanding that good local access to education can unlock real opportunities and growth.</para>
<para>There are few places that the Albanese government's commitment to accessible education is more visible than at the Suburban Study Hub Macquarie Fields in my electorate of Hughes. This study hub is a game changer for students and residents in south-west Sydney. For those students living in the Macarthur suburbs of Macquarie Fields, Glenfield, Ingleburn, Long Point and Bardia, travel to university can involve long hours in the car or on trains or buses every day. Those in the outer suburbs of Sydney without good public transport connections often feel acutely the challenge of commuting to a metropolitan campus while juggling insecure work or other commitments. For mature-age students or parents caring for children while trying to upskill, that commute is a critical determinant. For the quiet Australians in the outer suburbs of southern and south-western Sydney, accessibility is not a buzzword. It can be the difference between pursuing higher education and being held back simply by the accident of geography.</para>
<para>Proximity is powerful. The new Macquarie Fields suburban university study hub has been a game changer for so many students in my electorate. It provides high-speed internet, dedicated quiet study spaces, academic support and a welcoming learning community right at their doorstep. It transforms the tyranny of distance into an accessible pathway to further opportunities. The Macquarie Fields suburban university study hub is one of 14 new suburban university study hubs, along with 20 new regional university study hubs. It is so much more than a quality facility. It represents the core philosophy of the universities accord, breaking barriers to higher education and expanding opportunity for all.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government has also, for the first time, introduced paid prac for teaching nursing, midwifery and social work students. Now we're expanding it to cover 10 more courses, including clinical psychology, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech pathology, paramedicine, radiography, pharmacy, rehab therapy, audiology and podiatry. These are some of the most essential jobs in my community in southern Sydney and across Australia, but too many students in these roles have been forced to choose between continuing in their studies and paying their bills as they give up paid work to take on weeks of unpaid placements.</para>
<para>I recently spoke with student pharmacists Mia, Shi-Anne and Sebastian and heard firsthand about the huge difference that this will make to students studying these courses. Mia, Shi-Anne and Sebastian told me that it would be an enormous relief to students like them, allowing them to progress in their studies without having to forgo the paid work that covers their rent and groceries. It means students will get more opportunities to do placements in their community without having to worry about how they'll pay their rent and their bills. They told me about students having to moonlight their paid jobs with their pracs, which is stopping them from getting enough rest and putting safety at risk. This bill, the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026, aims to stop that.</para>
<para>For them, paid prac will go on to be one of those reforms that, when they look back in the future, they won't believe wasn't already there. We shouldn't routinely be making students choose between finishing a degree and paying the rent on their home. Paid prac is both sensible cost-of-living relief for students and an investment in our future health workforce and Medicare.</para>
<para>With the rise of AI and uncertainty surrounding work, access to higher education is a must-have. Lifelong learning is a critical component in a workforce that is dynamic, future focused and ready to pursue, head on, the coming trends in the labour market and the wider economy. The universities accord states that, in the coming decades, the number of Australians in the workforce with a certificate, diploma or degree will need to rise to 80 per cent. That means more mature-age workers in TAFE or university learning new skills to prepare for a rapidly changing world of work. Accessible higher education is what turns headwinds into tailwinds and approaching storms into rising tides. Workers that are capable and equipped with the skills and confidence to take advantage of new technologies are able to withstand these powerful forces and shape them to propel Australia's future prosperity.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government has wasted no time in confronting these challenges head on. We have already implemented more than 30 of the accord's recommendations in full or in part: HECS relief and reform, introducing and expanding paid prac, rolling out suburban and regional university study hubs, increasing the number and availability of bridging courses, improving safety and governance, giving First Nations communities greater access to Commonwealth supported places and empowering our university regulators to steward the sector with an eye to the future.</para>
<para>Building on the $2.5 billion committed in the 2024-25 financial year, this bill introduces an additional $3.6 billion investment into higher education over the next decade. This transformative funding injection will fundamentally re-engineer how university places are allocated. Contrast this with the previous government's disastrous demolition job on higher education. Under the job-ready graduates scheme, higher education funding became mired in a tangled web of arbitrary caps and misaligned incentives, with an ideological government committed to picking winners and white-anting programs.</para>
<para>This bill is overhauling that broken model with a new managed growth funding system. Managed by the ATEC, this system will directly align Commonwealth funding with actual student enrolments and expand the number of university places allocated to students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and regional areas. It will effectively uncap the number of places for students from these backgrounds. If a student has the talent and determination, they will have a place in our higher education system if they want it. It will also formalise the role of the ATEC in allocating Commonwealth supported places. These changes are projected to result in an extra 200,000 commencing domestic students at Australian universities over the next decade. That's 200,000 lives forever changed and 200,000 skilled workers added to our economy.</para>
<para>We're also introducing demand-driven needs-based funding to provide extra support for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, for First Nations students and for students studying at regional campuses. In some cases, this will more than double the amount of funding per student. The base equity amount will be set at $1,535, and the base regional amount at $1,398. That is more than twice the average amount provided to universities per student last year, which in some cases was as little as $600 under the previous program.</para>
<para>Universities will be able to allocate this funding towards the bread-and-butter components of student success such as tailored academic tutoring and peer mentoring to help students master complex subjects; direct financial assistance through scholarships and grants; and the offsetting of higher operational costs of running regional and satellite campuses, ensuring that institutions like the Sutherland campus of the University of Wollongong—of which I was a student—can keep their doors open.</para>
<para>Higher education changes lives. When I reflect on my time walking through the grounds of that campus of the University of Wollongong as a student, it's clear that it changed mine. And when I visit the vibrant suburban study hub in Macquarie Fields, I know that students in my electorate and across southern and south-western Sydney will be able to access the same opportunities that I had as a student. The doors of opportunity are there, and good access to higher education is the key to unlock them. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I join my colleagues on this side of the House in speaking in support of the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. It is in the national interest and it should be our aim to ensure that every person has the opportunity to pursue the career of their choice and for which they have a passion. However, that has not always been the case, and it's still not the case, albeit that Australia provides more career opportunities than most other countries, particularly under the Albanese government's free TAFE policy and changes to the Higher Education Loan Program.</para>
<para>I understand that over 800,000 Australians have now enrolled in a free TAFE course, and that is good for the nation and good for the individuals. Those figures also highlight that young people in particular but also others want to further their education and achieve a professional degree or trade certificate if it is made easier for them to do so. Former Labor prime minister Gough Whitlam, just over half a century ago, understood that. It was under his leadership that, in 1974, university and tertiary education was made free and opened up to all Australians. In 1989, the Hawke government introduced HECS, the Higher Education Contribution Scheme, to ensure university funding was sustainable while still ensuring university education was accessible to everyone.</para>
<para>Today, around 60 per cent of high school students enrol in a university course, compared to around 12 to 14 per cent back in 1974. The 60 per cent university attendance rate now puts Australia at above average in attendance when compared with most other advanced countries. However, we still have a way to go when compared to countries like South Korea, Japan and Canada, which have university attendance rates of more like 70 per cent or just under. South Korea and Japan, in particular, are good examples of the importance of education, both countries having become economic powerhouses through science and innovation industries that rely on university education.</para>
<para>We also know that young people from disadvantaged or regional families are still often faced with barriers to university education. In particular, living costs while at university, the need to enter the workforce at a younger age to support their families and, for regional students, simply having to live away from home are real barriers for many young people. It is up to us in this parliament to try and break down those barriers. They result in a lot of young people losing out because they don't get to university—young people who quite often are very smart, but they come from disadvantaged families and therefore never get the opportunity to put their ability to the full test. It seems to me that, as a result of that, it is not only the younger person that misses out on the career that they might otherwise have wanted to pursue but also the nation that misses out, because those young people could have made a significant contribution to the prosperity of our country had they been able to get their university degree or even a further education degree in another field.</para>
<para>I know from past university attendance rates of high school students from Adelaide's northern suburbs that students that come from disadvantaged communities are far less likely to get to university. Indeed, in one study going back some 15 years, it was suggested that perhaps as much as seven times the rate of university participation occurred from the wealthier suburbs as occurred from the northern suburbs of Adelaide, which were at the time considered lower socioeconomic communities. Looking at some figures from the census, it's very clear that the attendance rates of young people from low-socioeconomic areas or areas that are disadvantaged are far lower than they are for those from what we might refer to as the wealthier suburbs. We need to correct that, as I said earlier, both for the good of the young person and for the good of the nation.</para>
<para>Having said that, it's not to imply that everybody wants a university degree—and I accept that some young people simply don't—or indeed that university qualifications are more important than others. Again, every job is important and we cannot have a society without all of those jobs being filled up. But what we need to focus on is ensuring that everybody who wants to pursue a career that requires a university degree can do so—particularly as we now have free TAFE and they can pursue a trade qualification by doing that.</para>
<para>This legislation has four key objectives. Firstly, it embeds a new managed growth system. Secondly, it establishes demand driven, needs based funding to support students from underrepresented backgrounds. Thirdly, it formalises the role of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, otherwise known as ATEC, in allocating Commonwealth supported places. And, fourthly, it establishes a framework for ATEC's existing function of allocating international student places.</para>
<para>I want to speak just briefly on international students because it's subject matter that has been given a lot of public discourse over recent months. In 2025, there were some 800,000 to 850,000 international students who studied in Australia, according to one source. They were contributing around $53 billion to the Australian economy. That's a significant input into our economy—$53 billion. In 2024, over $12 billion of direct university income came from international students. In other words, it was money that came from overseas into our country. Again, it is a fairly significant export, if I could use that term to describe what is happening. Indeed, it's often said that the higher education sector is the fourth-biggest export that we have in this country.</para>
<para>Over 50 per cent of those students who were coming to this country were coming from China, India, Nepal, Vietnam, Bangladesh and the Philippines. You could argue that, perhaps with the exception of China today, all of those countries are still developing countries. I'll come back to that in a moment. I think that there is an importance in our accommodating international students if they are coming from developing countries. One of the things it enables us to do is assist those developing countries by opening up our universities to their students, who can get the qualifications they need and then go back to their countries and use those qualifications to help their own people. In my view, that is an important thing that we should be doing as a good global citizen. But I notice that, regrettably, those student numbers are falling. In fact, using the last figures I was able to get hold of, they have fallen by about 20 per cent to a figure of about 680,000.</para>
<para>In addition to the point I just made about international students going back to their countries—they are also building strong bonds with this country by doing so—the reality is that, while they are here, those international students are creating jobs in the university sector and jobs for many local businesses that support them during their stay in Australia. So, if we as a nation are to reduce the number of international students that come into this country, there will be flow-on effects as a result. I respectfully suggest to everyone in this place that the issue of university students should be very carefully managed, because there will be consequences, whichever way we go with respect to their numbers.</para>
<para>Another matter that I want to briefly touch on is the issue of medical places. Ever since I've been in this place, we've spoken about the shortage of GPs in particular and other health professionals more broadly throughout the country, particularly in the regional and remote areas of Australia. There is no question that we have a shortage of GPs. Quite often, we are relying on GPs from overseas to fill the shortages that we have. It has been the case for years because, in my view, the medical places offered by our universities in this country have been rigidly capped. I'm not sure why that is the case, but I suspect it's in order to protect the existing medical profession. My view is that, if we are ever to have the workforce we need—particularly across all of the health professional areas and, as I said, in the GP space, where I know that there is definitely a shortage—then we need not only to have the universities relax their entry criteria for those students who want to pursue a medical career but also to increase the number of medical places that are available within the universities themselves.</para>
<para>The third issue I want to speak about with respect to universities is another that is raised with me from time to time. Again, it often gets a fair bit of media reporting as well. It is the issue of the salaries paid to vice-chancellors. I looked up the list of what vice-chancellors are being paid in universities across Australia and it ranged from about a million dollars to a million and a half dollars. That's the kind of income they are currently getting. At the same time, I see universities cutting staffing levels, support services for the students that go there and other expenditure.</para>
<para>From a sector that is largely government funded, the payments to vice-chancellors are widely seen throughout the community as being excessive. The federal government funds our universities, and in 2024 the universities across Australia were funded to the tune of about $21 billion. That was to cover the entrance fees and so on of students. Nevertheless it's direct government funding that goes into them. Government funding is taxpayer funding. Salaries of a million dollars or more to vice-chancellors may be the norm, but they need to be justified, because right now, when so many people are doing it tough, they're constantly asking the question: why are universities paying those kinds of salaries to their vice-chancellors?</para>
<para>I also note that there has been some criticism of this legislation by some of the industry groups, including the Business Council of Australia and others. I think the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry also flagged some concerns they have with the legislation. I don't dismiss their concerns. I think they have raised some legitimate concerns that need to be considered. Having said that, I believe that this legislation goes a long way to achieving what we all want to achieve, and that is to ensure that everybody who wants to get a university degree can do so and that, in particular, young people from remote, rural and regional places of Australia or disadvantaged communities within the metropolitan areas are able to get to university when they can.</para>
<para>I'm pleased to see that the minister is sticking to that view and has provided this legislation, which I genuinely believe goes a long way to doing that. Sure, it may be that we will need to closely watch what happens in the year or two ahead, and I'm sure the minister is fully aware of that and will do so. But I believe the legislation achieves an objective that was started by the Whitlam government over half a century ago, and that is to ensure that everybody who wants to get a university degree can do so. I commend this legislation to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to make my contribution to the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. It's sometimes forgotten, but the history books record that, on 5 December 1973, Lionel Bowen, then a Whitlam minister, announced that there would be two new universities, one in Campbelltown and one in Albury-Wodonga. Later, on 26 February 1974, the federal Minister for Education, Kim Beazley Sr, announced nearly $100,000 in funding for the New South Wales government for the establishment of the university in Campbelltown.</para>
<para>Perhaps much more widely known is the decision by Whitlam to open the gates to universities by abolishing fees to attend. I'm told that, towards the end of his life, letters of thanks from grateful students, especially women who benefited from Gough's decision, were the most common that he would receive. Whitlam was, of course, deeply committed to Western Sydney University. It houses his papers and library and continues his legacy through research, publications and promoting public discourse. From a personal perspective, Western Sydney University has also provided my own children with an excellent tertiary education, one which will serve them for the rest of their lives.</para>
<para>As much as Medicare is a part of Labor's DNA, so is our commitment to education. Labor believes that one of the key vehicles to improving the lives of Australians is education, from early childhood right through to university and beyond. In this ever-changing world, the demands on our education system are immense, not just to produce an educated workforce but also to produce educated thinkers. In the ensuing years after Whitlam, Labor's commitment to education has never wavered. We're always looking for new ways to bolster our learning institutions in whatever manner or shape they take. For example, in the early childhood sector, the Albanese Labor government increased childcare subsidies. Further, to address critical workforce shortages, we've championed a historic pay rise.</para>
<para>In relation to our schools, the Albanese Labor government has introduced scholarships and the Commonwealth prac payment to support those who are in training. In addition, through the Better and Fairer Schools Agreement, this government is putting every public school and the 2.6 million students who attend them on the path of receiving full funding.</para>
<para>TAFE has not escaped the government's attention either. Indeed, I would argue that Labor's commitment to the fee-free TAFE program will go down in history as the most significant education policy announcement since Federation. As a result of this decision in 2023, the program has recorded over 650,000 enrolments and more than 170,000 course completions. Not only that, this government has now established fee-free TAFE as a permanent feature of Australia's VET system. The Albanese Labor government stands proud of the achievements in the education sector, but, like in all areas of public administration, there is always more to do.</para>
<para>That brings us to the bill before us today. In 2024, the government released the final report of the Australian Universities Accord. In short, the accord provides a blueprint for higher education reform over the next number of decades. Of the accord's 47 recommendations, the Albanese government has already implemented, either in part or in full, 30 of the recommendations. Some of the reforms implemented include cutting HECS debt by 20 per cent, capping indexation on HECS debts to the lower of the CPI or the WPI, doubling the number of university study hubs, establishing the Australian Tertiary Education Commission—the ATEC—introducing the National Student Ombudsman and increasing the number of fee-free university bridging courses.</para>
<para>Part of the universities accord states that to meet Australia's future workforce needs, the number of people in the workforce with a certificate, diploma or degree will need to be around 80 per cent. This means that people will need to attend either TAFE or uni, and, for this to be achieved, action needs to be taken now. The Australian Universities Accord thankfully provides the blueprint to deliver on this target by recommending a new funding model for higher education that is planned and managed by the Australian Tertiary Education Commission.</para>
<para>The accord also recommends increasing the number of higher education students from underrepresented backgrounds. In response to the accord's recommendations, in the 2024-25 MYEFO the Albanese Labor government committed an additional $2.5 billion to Australia's higher education system over the next decade. The bill before us enacts that commitment through a new funding system. In addition, it will also embed a new managed growth funding system and establish demand driven needs based funding to support students from underrepresented backgrounds to both access and succeed in university. Further, the bill will also formalise the role of ATEC in allocating supported places.</para>
<para>In effect, the new Managed Growth Funding System will remove the cap on the number of places for students from regional areas and low socioeconomic backgrounds. In raw numbers, it is expected that this will result in an additional 200,000 domestic students commencing at university over the next decade. For universities, the funding will work a little similar to Gonski for schools—that is, the more students a university has that meet the criteria, the more funding they will receive to help these students succeed. The bill sets the base equity amount at $1,535 and the base regional amount at $1,398. That's more than double the amount provided to universities per student last year. Universities will be able to put this additional funding towards things such as tutoring, mentoring and other academic supports, as well as direct financial assistance.</para>
<para>In addition to these welcome reforms, the bill in front of us today also sets out the framework for ATEC to exercise its existing functions to allocate international student places. Further, it makes small technical amendments to modernising the sharing of information between the Commonwealth Ombudsman, TEQSA and ATEC.</para>
<para>The bill, in its title, includes the words 'opening the doors of opportunity', and those are words I heartily endorse. The Albanese Labor government is committed to opening the doors of opportunity for all Australians, regardless of their age or where they live. Gough Whitlam spent his entire time in public life working to create opportunities for all Australians while also dismantling the inequalities that by their very existence denied access to such opportunities. I, as the current member for Werriwa, am equally committed to these aims and ideals. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 delivers important reform for Australian students, universities and the future workforce of Australia. This legislation is about much more than changing funding arrangements. It's about opening the doors of opportunity to more Australians. It's about recognising that talent exists in every suburb, every regional town and every remote community and ensuring that a person's circumstances do not determine the limits of their ambition.</para>
<para>Education has always been one of Australia's greatest strengths. It has transformed lives and driven our national prosperity. For generations, Australians have understood that investing in education is investing in the future of our country. Every doctor treating patients in our hospitals, every engineer designing critical infrastructure, every teacher standing in front of a classroom and every researcher developing tomorrow's breakthroughs began with access to education. The responsibility of this parliament is to ensure that opportunity remains available to every generation that follows.</para>
<para>In February 2024, the Albanese Labor government received the final report of the Australian Universities Accord. The accord was not simply another review to gather dust on a shelf. It was developed as a blueprint for higher education reform over the next decade and the decade beyond. It asked an important question: what sort of tertiary education system will Australia need if we are to remain prosperous, competitive and resilient in an increasingly complex world? Its conclusion was clear: Australia must prepare today for the workforce demands of tomorrow.</para>
<para>The accord found that, by 2050, around 80 per cent of Australia's working-age population will require a certificate, diploma or degree qualification. That represents one of the most significant workforce transitions our nation has ever faced. New technologies are transforming industries. Artificial intelligence is reshaping workplaces. The transition to clean energy is creating new occupations. Advanced manufacturing is becoming increasingly sophisticated. Healthcare demands continue to grow as our population ages. Every one of those challenges points to the same conclusion—that Australia will need more skilled workers than ever before.</para>
<para>Meeting that demand cannot happen overnight. It requires long-term planning and a continuous source of investment. Most importantly, it requires a government prepared to act before the pressures become crises. That is exactly what the Albanese Labor government has done. Rather than treating the Universities Accord report as just another report, we have treated it as a road map for reform. Already the government has implemented more than 30 of the accord's 47 recommendations in full or in part. That record demonstrates our commitment to not simply talking about education reform but delivering it.</para>
<para>Australians have already seen meaningful improvements flowing from that work. Millions of graduates carrying HECS debts have benefited from reforms that make the system fairer with the 20 per cent HECS cuts last year. We have capped indexation to the lower of the consumer price index or wage price index. We have introduced a fairer marginal repayment system. We have lifted the minimum repayment threshold so Australians are not forced to begin repayments before they are financially ready to.</para>
<para>These reforms recognise that education should create opportunity rather than unnecessary financial hardship. They ensure graduates can focus on building their careers, buying a home and starting a family without carrying an unfair burden created by an outdated repayment system.</para>
<para>This government has also recognised that financial barriers extend well beyond student loans. For too long, students studying essential qualifications like teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work were expected to complete extensive professional placements while often sacrificing the income they relied upon to support themselves. Many talented Australians simply could not afford to finish the exact degrees our country desperately needs.</para>
<para>That is why the introduction of paid prac represents such an important reform. It acknowledges that practical placements are essential to these professions. It also acknowledges that asking students to work without financial support places an unreasonable burden upon them. Supporting students through these placements is an investment in Australia's future teachers, nurses, midwives and social workers. It is an investment that will strengthen communities across the nation.</para>
<para>Access to higher education has also been expanded through the establishment of additional university study hubs. There are 20 new Regional University Study Hubs and 14 new Suburban University Study Hubs which are helping Australians study closer to home. Free university bridging courses have been expanded, creating new pathways for students who may not have followed a traditional academic journey. Demand driven Commonwealth supported places have been extended to First Nations students who achieve the required entry standards. The National Student Ombudsman has been established. The National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence is strengthening safety across university campuses. Taken together, these reforms represent a comprehensive effort to improve both access and the student experience.</para>
<para>The government has also established the Australian Tertiary Education Commission. The creation of ATEC reflects one of the central recommendations of the Universities Accord—long-term challenges require long-term stewardship. Australia's tertiary education system cannot be managed effectively through short electoral cycles alone. It requires strategic planning. It requires evidence based decision making. It requires an organisation capable of looking beyond immediate pressures and ensuring that investment aligns with Australia's future workforce needs.</para>
<para>The legislation before the House builds directly upon that foundation. In the 2024-25 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, the Albanese Labor government committed an additional $2.5 billion to Australia's higher education system over the next decade. That investment recognises the simple truth—ambitious reforms cannot be achieved without meaningful investment. It introduces a new funding system designed to support growth, improve equity and provide universities with greater certainty as they prepare for the future.</para>
<para>One of the most significant reforms contained within this legislation is the creation of the managed growth funding system. The existing funding model has struggled to keep pace with Australia's changing workforce requirements. Universities have faced uncertainty when making long-term decisions about infrastructure, staffing and student support. The new managed growth funding system addresses those shortcomings, as it aligns Commonwealth funding more closely with actual enrolments. This will provide greater certainty for universities. It creates a more sustainable framework for long-term planning. Perhaps most importantly, it effectively uncaps the number of places available to students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and regional Australia. This is something that will help students in the north of Adelaide to be offered the opportunity everyone else in the nation has access to.</para>
<para>For too long, many capable Australians have faced barriers that had nothing to do with their talent or their determination. Students from regional communities often confront additional accommodation costs. Many relocate hundreds of kilometres from home to study, while others balance work, caring responsibilities and education simultaneously. Young Australians from disadvantaged backgrounds frequently encounter financial pressures. That means that a university education cannot be a priority. These barriers deserve practical solutions rather than sympathetic words and token gestures.</para>
<para>The Universities Accord recognises that increasing student participation alone would never be enough. Students must also be supported to succeed once they arrive on campus. That recommendation sits at the heart of this bill. The legislation establishes a new demand driven, needs based funding system designed to ensure universities receive additional resources for students who require greater support. Students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, First Nations students and students studying at regional campuses are groups that have historically faced structural barriers to higher education.</para>
<para>This funding recognises that equity cannot simply be measured by who enrols but must also be measured by who graduates. Felix Hughes, the national president of the National Union of Students, welcomed these reforms, saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">These reforms recognise that equity must be built into the higher education funding system and that supporting students from underrepresented backgrounds is essential to creating a more accessible higher education system.</para></quote>
<para>Those words capture exactly why this legislation matters. Equity cannot be an afterthought. It must be embedded within the funding model itself.</para>
<para>The approach adopted through this bill reflects a principle that Australians already understand from school funding. Just as the Gonski reforms recognised that some schools require greater support to achieve equitable outcomes, this legislation recognises that universities that are supporting greater numbers of disadvantaged students should receive additional funding to help those students succeed. The funding supports need and aspirations in all communities across this nation.</para>
<para>Under these arrangements, the base equity amount will be set at $1,535, and the base regional amount will be set at $1,398. Those figures are significant, because they represent more than double the average support available under comparable programs only last year, where funding could be as little as $600 per student. That additional investment will make a tangible difference. It will allow universities to expand tutoring programs and strengthen mentoring services. Additional scholarships and direct financial assistance can be provided for students who require it. Regional campuses can receive assistance to offset the higher costs of operating outside metropolitan centres. These are practical investments that improve retention, completion and student success.</para>
<para>Professor Mary O'Kane AC, who chaired the Universities Accord, observed that Australia needs 'a tertiary education system that is fit for the future'. The challenges facing Australia in 2050 cannot be addressed by using funding models designed decades ago. We need an education system that evolves in tandem with our economy. It must remain responsive to the changing technologies, emerging industries and workforce shortages.</para>
<para>The Universities Accord also recognised that Australia's future prosperity depends on having a highly educated population capable of adapting to continual change. A stronger higher education system means businesses can access the skilled workers they need. It means that regional communities are better placed to recruit healthcare professionals. It means that schools benefit from more graduates entering the teaching profession. It means that emerging industries gain the expertise required to drive innovation and economic growth. That is how investment in education becomes an investment in Australia's future prosperity.</para>
<para>Ultimately, this matters to every Australian who wants our nation to remain competitive in the increasingly knowledge based global economy. The government expects that these reforms will support an additional 200,000 commencing domestic university students over the next decade. That represents 200,000 individual stories. No two backgrounds and aspirations will be the same: young Australians becoming the first in their family to attend university; regional students returning home with qualifications that strengthen local communities; First Nations graduates bringing new expertise and leadership into every profession; and adults returning to education to retrain for entirely new careers. Every one of those students represents potential unlocked. Every graduate strengthens Australia's future.</para>
<para>The legislation also formalises the role of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission in allocating Commonwealth supported places. This reflects another important recommendation of the accord. The modern education system requires coordinated planning across the entire sector, and the ATEC will provide that stewardship. The bill will also establish a framework supporting the commission's role in allocating international student places where a determination is made by the Minister for Education.</para>
<para>The legislation also modernises information-sharing between the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency and the ATEC. Although technical in nature, these amendments improve cooperation between agencies and strengthen oversight across the higher education sector. Good public administration is built upon good information. An effective regulation depends upon agencies working together. These reforms support both those ideas.</para>
<para>Legislation of this nature asks us to think well beyond the present. It asks us to consider the Australia we hope to build over the coming decades. Will it be an Australia where opportunity remains centred among the few fortunate, or will it be an Australia where talent is recognised wherever it is found? The Albanese Labor government has made its choice. We believe every Australian deserves the opportunity to fulfil their potential. We believe higher education should be accessible, affordable and focused on student success. We believe our universities should be properly funded to meet the challenges of a changing world. Most importantly, we believe investing in people is the smartest investment any nation can make. Education has long been one of the foundations of Australia's success. It has strengthened our democracy, driven economic growth and created opportunities that have transformed countless lives. For all those reasons, I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For the information of honourable members, I present an addendum to the explanatory memorandum to this bill.</para>
<para>I'd like to thank all members for their contribution to this debate. This bill will help to open the doors of opportunity to our universities to more young people from poor families, from regional Australia and from the bush. It introduces a new managed-growth funding system that will provide an extra $3.6 billion and support an extra 230,000 commencing students over the next decade. It establishes a new demand driven, needs based funding system to help students from poor backgrounds, Indigenous students and students studying in the regions to participate and succeed in their studies—think Gonski for universities. It also gives the Australian Tertiary Education Commission the power to make decisions on international student allocations for eligible higher education providers each year.</para>
<para>In her contribution to the debate on this bill, the member for Lyne, opposite us, said this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">At the end of the day, the test for this legislation is simple. Will it create more opportunities for regional Australians? Will it strengthen pathways into nursing, teaching, allied health and other professions our community desperately needs? Will it help more students study closer to home? Will it help communities—like Taree, Gloucester, Wingham and Forster—build the workforce they need for the future? If it does, then it will be a worthwhile reform …</para></quote>
<para>The answer to that question is yes, yes and yes. Let me give you a few examples. In New South Wales, at universities like Charles Sturt University that have campuses in Wagga and Orange and Bathurst and Dubbo and Albury-Wodonga and Port Macquarie, it means somewhere between $200 million and $500 million of extra funding over the next decade. In Queensland, at universities like Central Queensland University with campuses in Townsville, Rockhampton, Mackay, Bundaberg, Cairns, Gladstone and Emerald, it means up to $260 million in extra funding over the next decade. It's the same story in other parts of the country where there are regional universities—more kids from the regions going to uni, more kids from the regions finishing uni and more teachers, more nurses and more frontline workers studying, staying and working in the regions. It's the sort of thing that I hope the National Party will enthusiastically support. It's the sort of thing that the member for Lyne has said she will support.</para>
<para>The overwhelming majority of submissions to the Senate inquiry into this bill support what the government is looking to do here. The 2050 Alliance support this bill, and in their submission they say it is 'a critical step in implementing the policy and funding framework to deliver the accord's goals of increasing tertiary participation and equity by 2050'. James Cook University have said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Bill has the potential to introduce fairness into educational outcomes by addressing the failed market dynamics in the higher education system that has for too long disadvantaged regional people and places.</para></quote>
<para>The University of Tasmania, that state's only university, support the bill and welcome the establishment of needs based funding as an enduring, demand responsive part of the Commonwealth's core teaching funding architecture. It is one of the most important improvements to university funding in a generation. On meeting Australia's future skills research and productivity needs, Flinders University have said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We agree that achieving this goal requires a managed, national approach to growth and funding, rather than a model which risks concentration in a small number of large metropolitan universities at the expense of the under-represented students and regional communities that institutions such as Flinders exist to serve.</para></quote>
<para>Following the second reading, the government will move amendments to correct some minor drafting issues in the bill, and on Monday the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee will hear from the sector and other stakeholders. I greatly look forward to the committee's report and to any recommendations for improvements, which, of course, the government will consider carefully. As always, the government is open to considering sensible and appropriate amendments, because this is an important bill. It means more young people from poor families, from the regions and from the bush getting a crack at going to university and getting the support they need to succeed when they get there. It will open the doors of opportunity wider. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Kooyong has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that that amendment be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question now is that this bill be now read a second time.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
<para>Messages from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for the bill and proposed amendments announced.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (Strengthening Accountability for Tax Adviser Misconduct and Other Measures) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>126</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7514" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Strengthening Accountability for Tax Adviser Misconduct and Other Measures) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
            <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
              <span class="HPS-Normal">Consideration resumed of the motion:</span>
            </p>
            <p class="HPS-Small" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
              <span class="HPS-Small">That this bill be now read a second time.</span>
            </p>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I will just put out straight away that the opposition is not going to oppose the Treasury Laws Amendment (Strengthening Accountability for Tax Adviser Misconduct and Other Measures) Bill 2026. We are, however, going to, hopefully, refer this bill in the Senate to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee. I am hearing that maybe there's been a dirty deal done between the government and the Greens, and that may not happen, but there are some very good reasons why you would want to refer this bill.</para>
<para>There are eight schedules in this bill, most of them uncontroversial, but there are two that we think are important and significant. One is effectively imposing a new tax on energy and infrastructure projects in Australia, but it does give a tax concession to renewable energy projects only. We support the fact that you might want to look at a capital gains tax put on foreign investment in this country. We think there's merit in investigating that; maybe foreign investors can pay more tax than they currently are on those assets. But already we know there's a tax break for renewable investors and nowhere else.</para>
<para>While we want this to go to the Senate economics committee—Deputy Speaker Boyce, with the region you're from, you'd certainly know this—we have very large projects in Australia that need and use foreign capital to build. In particular, we are a large energy exporter. We've seen large exports in the gas industry and we want these investments. It's very important for energy security not just for us but also, indeed, for the world and for export earnings that those investments continue to be made in Australia. So we want the Senate economics committee to investigate this, because you've got to get the balance right between whether there is a fair limit that foreign investors can pay on asset appreciation in these industries that we don't have now and what level we get to where we start killing off these investments. Beetaloo is one, Deputy Speaker, which you will know about. There are some very big investments in energy and other areas that we want to make sure have security of investment and will get up.</para>
<para>To that, I think it should be very important to the government side that there's a Senate committee hearing into the $6 billion Karratha ammonia-urea project too. It's very important we have sovereign capability in that. I've spoken to the investors in that, the people who are looking at that project. It was very tight as to whether this would go ahead, even with government support. This tax is the type of thing that could throw those things and mean they become unviable to build in Australia. Another one that the Prime Minister has been starting to talk about is proposed oil refinery capability in this country. These types of things are what we want the Senate economics committee to look into to see that we get the tax level right so that we don't mean that they're unviable for foreign capital.</para>
<para>I am hearing, unfortunately but not surprisingly, that a dirty deal is being done between the Greens and Labor where they will give a tax break on this foreign capital to renewables but renewables only. That's probably a reason we really do need to have a Senate economics committee look into this.</para>
<para>To give a bit more data around the bill, at the moment, foreign investors pay capital gains tax on real property, which is the land or interest they have in the land. Assets that aren't land currently aren't always captured with this, which aligns with international tax principles. Investors have argued through multiple court cases that things like powerlines, turbines, solar panels, batteries, pipelines and major mining and manufacturing equipment aren't Australian real property. The problem is that the definition of 'real property' wasn't defined in the income tax law, and this bill is dealing with that. Labor originally also announced that it would backdate these changes to 2006, retrospectively applying the tax, and override Federal Court decisions, but they have been forced into an embarrassing backflip on that already. Schedule 2, as I said, rewrites the definition.</para>
<para>I have some empathy and I understand why I think it's a good idea to look at this, but I restate the case that we do not want to kill off foreign investment into essential infrastructure in this country. As you know, some of these projects that we're talking about can be in the tens and tens of billions of dollars, and we certainly sometimes need foreign capital to do that.</para>
<para>The 50 per cent discount to soften the change to renewables is also only for disposals up to 30 June 2030 at the moment, so it's a discount that changes nothing. Even though they have done a deal on renewables, the current discount that's public to 2030 will also mean that some of those will necessarily not go ahead in the future, because it's not a big enough discount.</para>
<para>I'll repeat what I've said. We need an ammonia-urea plant in Australia. We need an oil refinery built in Australia. These assets, often because of the size of them, depend heavily on major investment. Higher taxes make them harder to finance or more expensive to build. Already, the Prime Minister has said the two important things around those urea plants and also the oil refinery. We need a Senate economics committee to investigate this.</para>
<para>To go through some of the other schedules, the ones that aren't necessarily as contentious, schedule 1 goes to Tax Practitioners Board powers. It strengthens the TPB sanctions and introduces new suspension powers and civil penalties up to $18 million for bodies corporate. We support holding tax advisers to account. We support this schedule.</para>
<para>There are merger law fixes, technical amendments to the new merger control regime, clarifying that an acquisition needn't be notified and replacing an automatic voiding of non-notified deals with the court supervised model. We think that's reasonable enough as well.</para>
<para>Schedule 6 is for deductible gift recipients listing, granting tax-deductible donation status to a handful of named entities. We support those.</para>
<para>Schedule 5, on national competition policy references, updates the competition law to reference the 2024 National Competition Policy agreement and adds a ministerial power to prescribe future agreements.</para>
<para>Schedule 7 is renaming 'ancillary funds' as 'giving funds' and implements part of a Productivity Commission recommendation—uncontroversial.</para>
<para>Schedule 8 is an ATO administrative fix which aligns the law with the existing ATO practice on withholding credits.</para>
<para>Again, we are not opposing this bill in the House of Representatives, but this is a serious issue that we're looking at—getting the tax level right without killing off foreign investment in this country. We are going to refer it to a Senate economics committee, and we hope no dirty deal has been done between Labor and the Greens to kill that off.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>128</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Closing the Gap</title>
          <page.no>128</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Every year this parliament marks Closing the Gap with solemn language about partnership, healing and progress. But, every year, the data tells a different story. The Productivity Commission's <inline font-style="italic">Closing the gap annual data compilation report</inline><inline font-style="italic"> July 2026</inline>is now out. We're past the halfway point to 2031, the deadline for most targets under the national agreement. Of 19 targets, only one has been met. Three are on track, five are improving, but we won't get there on time, and on four targets we're going backwards.</para>
<para>On First Nations suicide, the trend is going backwards. On adult imprisonment—backwards. On the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children being removed from their families—backwards. These targets speak most directly to whether a child grows up safe and connected to mob and is given a future. But on each of these targets, we're moving away from our goals, not towards them.</para>
<para>In the Northern Territory, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania, the age of criminal responsibility is 10. In Victoria it's 12, but there's no certainty that an incoming Liberal-One Nation state government wouldn't walk that back. Only the ACT has raised the age to 14 years. In most Australian jurisdictions we still let 10-year-olds be arrested, charged and locked up. This government has not yet moved to raise the age of criminal responsibility despite overwhelming medical evidence on child brain development, the Standing Council of Attorneys-General's own working group and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child all recommending that it be increased to age 14. Every year that we fail to raise the age nationally, we choose prison cells over primary schools for children that we couldn't legally leave at home by themselves. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are dramatically overrepresented in the cohort imprisoned in early childhood.</para>
<para>Target 13 of Closing the Gap demands that we halve family violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children by 2031. We are nowhere near that. Indigenous women are hospitalised after family violence at more than 30 times the rate of non-Indigenous women, and, tragically, they're 10 times more likely to die as a result of assault. Aboriginal community controlled organisations have been telling the government for years what works: community led, properly and securely funded, culturally safe services. But remote and very remote communities, where the crisis is worst, are still those which are least resourced to respond to it. Last week in Mildura, two 12-year-old Aboriginal boys on a bike were allegedly chased through a pedestrian mall and struck by a ute. A man has been charged, and the matter is now before the courts. The fact of that—two kids on a bike mowed down deliberately at 80 kilometres an hour by a white man in a ute, and the fear and anger that that has provoked in Aboriginal communities across the country—is a tragic reflection of how we have failed and how we continue to fail to close the gap.</para>
<para>When child development outcomes are worsening, when hospitalisation rates for violence remain many multiples higher than for non-Indigenous Australians and when children as young as 10 can be jailed but 12-year-olds can be run down in a mall and the nation hardly reacts, it's the same crisis but in different datasets and in different headlines. We are not winning on our Closing the Gap commitments. On the measures that matter most for children's safety, whether they're locked up, whether they're taken into care, whether they're hospitalised because of family violence or whether they're lost to suicide, we're going backwards. This government has the power to raise the age of criminal responsibility nationally. It has the power to fund First Nations led family violence services properly for the long term. It has the power to do what NATSILS and more than 200 peak bodies asked the Prime Minister to do today—call an emergency summit on youth justice.</para>
<para>This government has the power to be honest about the gap between our rhetoric and our record. While we fail to do that, we fail Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Raksha Bandhan, Avian Influenza</title>
          <page.no>129</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I had the pleasure of attending the Raksha Bandhan Festival hosted by HOTA Forum, the Hindu Organisations, Temples and Associations Forum, last weekend. Raksha Bandhan is an important celebration on the Hindu calendar and an important celebration for the Indian community. It's a celebration of the relationship between brothers and sisters, and we are all brothers and sisters. Raksha Bandhan literally means 'bond of protection'. On Raksha Bandhan, sisters tie a sacred thread around the wrist of their brothers, and brothers return the affection and protection. This practice is based on the story of the Hindu god Krishna. Krishna hurt his finger, and Draupadi tore a strip from her sari to bandage the wound. It represents commitment, love and care between siblings.</para>
<para>At the festival, families wore traditional colourful clothes, delicious food was abundant, and we were all spellbound by the traditional Indian dance. I had the privilege of presenting awards to Indian and Hindu volunteers and organisations that have made a lasting impact on the South Australian community.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Boothby, the Indian community is the second largest by place of birth, and thousands of my constituents speak Punjabi, Gujarati and Hindi at home. The Shri Ganesha Temple in Boothby, the first Hindu temple in South Australia, is a central hub for the Indian and Hindu communities across southern Adelaide and was a recipient of one of the awards. They tell me that they have about 340 festivals at the temple every year, which is not quite one every day but very close.</para>
<para>The Raksha Bandhan Festival was a true celebration of Indian and Hindu culture. It's also a celebration of Australia's multicultural society and the fact that Indian and Hindu culture, and cultures from all around the world, have enriched and enhanced our way of life. Krishna himself advocates for the concept of unity in diversity, and that is one of Australia's very great strengths. Australia would be a drastically different place, a poorer place, without our diversity of cultures and experiences. Multiculturalism is who we are. Cultures from around the world have contributed to Australia for generations and centuries and are continuing to contribute to Australia. Multiculturalism defines us at our core. That's why the Albanese Labor government has committed to strengthening Multicultural Australia by investing $500 million in our multicultural communities.</para>
<para>There was a moment at the Raksha Bandhan festival when all the audience stood up to pledge their commitment to make Australia a better place. They pledged themselves, and they pledged their organisations. The festival, for me, was a reminder not just of sisterly and brotherly love but of the love shared between Australians, no matter where we've come from and no matter where we're going.</para>
<para>Sadly, the H5 bird flu has reached Australia, and South Australia has been particularly impacted. Our recent figures show 169 of the total 262 detected cases across Australia have been in South Australia, including a number of birds in Glenelg that have been found to have died from bird flu.</para>
<para>While the risk to humans is low, it does affect mammals, and it is progressing quickly among the wild bird population. Native species of bird are particularly vulnerable. Dozens of native South Australian birds have been categorised as being very highly susceptible to the disease, and many of these species are already vulnerable or endangered. There are more fears, for example, than it might spread to Seal Bay and Kangaroo Island and affect the endangered seal colony there.</para>
<para>While the disease can't be eradicated or contained, the best we can do is prepare. We've invested $113 million in preparedness measures, including over $47 million in wildlife resilience and protective action for threatened and priority species, $99 million in a recent budget for the Saving Native Species program. We've committed nearly $25 million to the H5 national management agreement to facilitate a coordinated response, and we're vaccinating our native birds in captivity. The South Australian government has invested over $1.2 million to enhance testing and decontamination capability, and South Australian wildlife organisations have received funding to upgrade their biosecurity measures.</para>
<para>I'd like to thank the Minister for the Environment and Water, Murray Watt, and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Julie Collins, for their attention and commitment to mitigating this disaster.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>130</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of welcoming the shadow minister for health and aged care, Senator Ruston, to my electorate of Cowper. My electorate is consistently ranked amongst the highest in the country for the number of residents accessing aged-care supports, so we are the perfect community for her to visit. While I routinely have shadow ministers in my electorate to better understand my community's needs, this invitation was specifically requested by some prominent members of Cowper's local aged-care industry.</para>
<para>There were two reasons for this request. Firstly, they wanted to outline their concerns about the negative trajectory that aged care has taken over the past few years but, more specifically, over the last 12 months. Secondly, they felt their calls for help and for change were being actively ignored by the minister, with one of the attendees going as far to say that they felt that they had been gaslit at recent industry events where the minister was presenting. We're no strangers to being gaslit during question time in this place by a government intent on avoiding questions and using the age-old 'divert, deflect and deny' strategy while waxing lyrical that Australians have never been better off, but it was truly disappointing to hear that this behaviour stretched beyond the confines of this place. So we designed a roundtable forum in Coffs Harbour and invited the wider aged-care provider community to join. Our forum's topics included financial stability, reform impacts, workforce shortages, clinical challenges and the increase in regulatory burdens that are affecting providers' ability to supply the dignity and the care that older Australians deserve.</para>
<para>By all accounts, we have an aged-care system that is going backwards. In the feedback that we received on the day and that has been flooding into my office in recent months, a consistent message has rung loud and clear: it is harder today for our older residents to access decent standards of care and harder for our local providers to supply that care than it was four years ago.</para>
<para>As the opposition, it's our responsibility not only to hold Labor to account on behalf of our constituents but also to form the counterpolicy that will fix these issues. I'm not going to pretend that the coalition got everything right when it came to aged care while we were in government. We didn't. But it must be acknowledged that things have been getting worse, not better. It's the duty of each successive government to create policies that will enact positive change for our communities and older Australians. But, as the Inspector-General of Aged Care, Natalie Siegel-Brown, stated last month, 'The way aged-care reform is being implemented is causing harm.' That is now an undisputed fact.</para>
<para>Since the most recent changes were implemented in November, we have seen the industry in freefall. Older Australians were promised dignity and independence, but Labor has delivered waiting lists, rationed care and a computer algorithm which determines their care needs. It is critical that we hear the issues and ideas of those at the coalface, but this minister and this government are actively avoiding that process, instead making decisions from the Canberra bubble without fully pressure testing the knock-on effects that bother providers and recipients.</para>
<para>Good policy is created on tables with seats filled by people who have lived experience and informed ideas. So I want to take this opportunity to thank Senator Ruston and her team for their dedication to understanding and addressing the needs of our older Australians, for listening to our local industry experts and for proactively forming the vital counterpolicies that Australians need to fix this mess that is our current aged-care system under this government.</para>
<para>I'd also like to thank every forum attendee for their time and commitment and for providing their feedback so well. Your voices are critical and we need to hear them echoed as strongly as possible in this place. To every older Australian in my electorate of Cowper who has reached out to my office to ask for help, I would like to say that we hear you. While those across the floor are burying their heads in the sand and dismissing your existence, we on this side are committed to fighting for you and finding the best way to provide the care and dignity you deserve.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Men's Health</title>
          <page.no>130</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEESDALE</name>
    <name.id>314526</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Earlier this month, I brought together local organisations and community representatives in Launceston for a healthy men's community conversation. We were joined by the Assistant Minister for Social Services and Assistant Minister for the Prevention of Family Violence, Ged Kearney, and the Special Envoy for Men's Health, Dan Repacholi. Tonight I want to share some of what we heard from the people in that room.</para>
<para>We began the night with one simple question: how might we change the story from 'I'm handling it' to 'I got some help with it'? What followed was an incredibly thoughtful, very generous and, at times, deeply personal conversation. Participants spoke about their own experiences, about the men and the boys they work with and about their families, their friends and their communities. One of the strongest messages we continually heard was about the barriers that can stop men asking for help. Participants spoke about the instinct to say, 'I'm doing okay; I'll be fine,' and to keep pushing through even when something is not right. They talked about the shame that can still be attached to vulnerability and asking for support and how difficult it can be to take that first step. But they were equally clear that changing the story cannot be about telling men or making men feel like they are the problem. They asked us to celebrate good men, to use positive and strength based language and to make it normal for someone to say to their mates, 'I went to the doctor for a check-up.' They wanted asking for help to be seen as a strength.</para>
<para>A message that really stayed with me was just how hard it can be to even know where to begin. One participant who's working with young people in our community captured it in a single sentence—'I just don't know where to start.' There are many services available, but participants told us that that does not necessarily mean that they are easy to find or easy to navigate. Sometimes people simply want to know who they can call. They want to speak to a real person. They want someone who can help them work out what happens next. As we heard repeatedly, the first door to better health is not always the door of a clinic. It might be a men's shed. It might be a sporting club, a workplace or a community organisation. It might simply be a conversation between two friends.</para>
<para>One of the most powerful moments of the afternoon came when a participant shared how a mate had noticed someone was struggling. They reached out and they helped them to get that support that they needed. It prompted a discussion about just how powerful mates can be for our health. A mate might notice when someone is not quite themselves. A coach might ask that extra question. A mentor might stay connected when someone is going through a difficult time. Participants told us that relationships become even more important during major changes in life—losing a job, a relationship breaking down, becoming a father or simply reaching a point where things feel harder than they did before.</para>
<para>We made sure that there was an incredibly strong focus on our young men and our boys. We asked: How do we raise healthy boys in this current environment? How do we help them to communicate honestly? How do we teach young people that looking after their mental health should be just as normal as looking after their physical health? We spoke about schools, families, sport, positive male role models and supporting dads from the moment that they become fathers and even before that. One participant described fatherhood as a powerful motivation to want to do better and to work to do better, and that really struck me.</para>
<para>A lot of what we heard was about not waiting until someone is actually in crisis. We need to make sure that the supports are available well before that. We need to make sure that there is connection, prevention and a sense of belonging and knowing where to turn. What was key for many of the men in the room was having someone around them who noticed when they needed a hand. By the end of the afternoon, participants had generated more than 50 questions and more than 50 ideas on how we as a nation at the federal level could help do things better. Those ideas will contribute to the National Healthy Men Community Conversations. They will help inform future work to support men and boys to be physically and mentally healthy. I want the people who joined us that afternoon to know that their contribution was absolutely heard, and it is valued. I'm incredibly grateful for your honesty and the openness in which you shared your experiences, your professional knowledge and, in many cases, deeply personal observations and reflections on either yourselves or the men in your lives that you care about.</para>
<para>We know that there's no single policy or program that can answer all of this, but perhaps there is something that all of us can take away.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care</title>
          <page.no>131</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yesterday would have been my father's 80th birthday, and we are almost a year exactly since he passed. I haven't spoken of his passing in this place before. I don't intend to too much tonight, but I would like to take the opportunity to reflect on the extraordinary amount of people in our health and aged-care system in Toowoomba who cared for him and who care for so many others in our community. My father's experience taught me that health care is not one service or one institution, and over the course of a serious illness a patient and their family encounter an entire community of people—doctors, nurses, surgeons, pharmacists, aged-care workers, specialists, volunteers and carers.</para>
<para>For dad, it was so great to have those people around him in his community in Toowoomba. His GPs were Dr King and Dr Palakudy at Mary Street Family Practice. They've cared for my family for a number of years now, and there's something reassuring about having doctors who don't just have your records there in front of them but who know the person, who know the family around them. I'd particularly like to thank my old friend Dr Steven Broad, who was there the very first day we heard the c word—cancer. It was a huge day.</para>
<para>Dad's major operation was a pelvic exenteration. That's an enormous operation, but it ultimately gave him six extra years of life. There's no adequate way for a family to say thank you for giving you that much time with someone you love. But those extra years came with huge additional care. Dad was able to remain in his home in South Toowoomba, supported through an aged-care package by the Churches of Christ. I want to thank the carers there.</para>
<para>When you're dealing with someone who has had major surgery, cancer, dementia, Parkinson's, it requires an immense amount of not just skill and patience but also humanity to do that job, and I thank them. His pharmacist was Sam Tanous on Margaret Street. Sam's got this huge smile on his face, and the way he looks after people is amazing. He's got incredible warmth. And it's not just how he treated my family; it's how he treated everybody. Indeed, across Australia, community pharmacists do far more than dispense medication. They know their customers. They answer questions. They know when something's changed. They help families like mine navigate very difficult health needs. Sam and his family are a great part of our community.</para>
<para>As Dad's needs increased, he found himself a new home at BlueCare at Middle Ridge. Despite his numerous attempts—often quite successful—to escape from that facility, I want to thank the staff, who always treated him with kindness. He may have wanted to get away at times, but it became his home, and they treated him well.</para>
<para>I also want to thank the Toowoomba and South West Ostomy Association. I've visited their offices and seen firsthand the work they do and the number of people that they support locally. Most people in our community and around Australia don't realise how much hard work these volunteers do. They quietly provide practical assistance, supplies, knowledge and reassurance to people whose lives have been changed by major surgery. Until your family needs organisations like these, you don't know how much we as a community rely upon them.</para>
<para>When my family moved to Toowoomba, it was for two reasons: good schools and good hospitals. My children are still benefiting from the good schools, and my father certainly benefited from the great hospitals and health care. Toowoomba is an extraordinary centre for health care around regional Australia. We do tend to think of health care in terms of those big things, but it's the entire network: the GPS, the pharmacists, the surgeons, the carers, the aged-care workers, the volunteers.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge people in my community who fought to improve our aged-care system, including my friend Kim Sutton. Kim's experience with her father going through aged care was very different to mine. We've spoken many times about what her father endured and the changes she believes need to occur in aged care, and I remain committed to working with her to see those changes through. I'll be honest: sometimes I felt a degree of guilt in seeing that difference, but I know that's why we're working together as a parliament to improve the aged-care system. I want to thank all those people. They treated a sometimes difficult old man with patience, humour and kindness, and those six years mattered. They mattered greatly, of course, to my father, and they mattered so much more to his family. A year after his passing, to all those people and to thousands across Toowoomba who quietly do this work for other families day in and day out, I simply want to say thank you.</para>
<para>I will also take the opportunity to thank my great team in my office who, during this very tough period, provided so much help to me and to my family—Scott O'Connell, Jo Doyle, Ruth Doyle, Rose Pauli and, of course, the excellent Greta Duan. They also treated a sometimes difficult old man with patience, humour and kindness, and I thank them too.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defibrillators, Operation Formal Wear, Bean Electorate: Acknowledgements, Gambling Bills</title>
          <page.no>132</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Firstly, well said, member for Groom. What a great tribute to both your father and the people who gave him great care.</para>
<para>I was fortunate enough recently to catch up with Val Dempsey, Senior Australian of the Year in 2022 and five-decade volunteer for St John's Ambulance, and she has asked me to issue a challenge to my colleagues across the House. Sudden cardiac arrest can impact people of all ages, genders and lifestyles. It does not discriminate. Approximately 10 per cent of people who experience a cardiac arrest outside of hospital survive. However, if good quality and timely CPR and AED are utilised, survival rates can increase to 70 per cent.</para>
<para>That is where Val and St John's Ambulance come in. St John's Ambulance ask governments, partners, funders and communities to get behind public access to defibrillators. I've had the opportunity to sponsor the installation of a defibrillator down at the Learn to Ride Centre at Lake Tuggeranong, and, with Val's assistance, I've been able to get a defibrillator installed in my electorate office in Greenway. With my office being located along the main street in central Tuggeranong, we knew it would be the ideal location for this life saving technology. Whilst we hope no-one will ever need to use it, we know the difference it can make. This is where I come back to the challenge. If I can get one installed in my electorate office, I encourage everyone in the chamber and across this parliament to do the same. Our offices are all centrally located within our communities and offer ideal secure locations for AEDs to be installed.</para>
<para>Operation Formal Wear is a community program run by Lake Tuggeranong Lions Club dedicated to allowing students to attend their school formals and events with confidence. All students across our community deserve to feel confident and like they belong. Running over the past four years, the program allows for the collection of formal wear so that it can be redistributed to students across our community who face financial or similar barriers when wanting to celebrate these important milestones. I'm happy to say my office is accepting donations as part of this drive and will continue to accept them through till early September. Once donations are made, they are sorted through and prepared so that students can, at no cost, select an outfit at one of a number of free shopping events, with the main event being hosted at the Lions Youth Haven on Kambah Pool Road in Kambah on the 10 and 11 October 2026. I'm proud that my office can play a part in this drive and continue to be used as a hub in our community.</para>
<para>Geoff Bennett has been barbecuing almost every Thursday for the Tuggeranong Valley Australian Football and Netball Club for over three years ever since his two sons began going to the club. His contribution was recently recognised through the Legend of the Tongs initiative, an 18-week long event hosted by Bunnings Warehouse recognising their efforts of volunteers. Geoff was nominated as a legend due to his role in creating a positive experience every Thursday alongside his unwavering dedication to the club. I've seen this dedication first-hand from Geoff and the countless volunteers that make our community sport possible. As Geoff said, 'football is not just a sport but a full-on community'.</para>
<para>And speaking of my community, I want to take this chance to thank Gus Filmer, a student from Caroline Chisholm School in my electorate, for not just writing sections of this speech but for joining us last sitting week. Thank you for joining my office, Gus, and for being one of the team. I hope this experience has given you some insight into how special our community is and the honour that it is to represent it.</para>
<para>Finally, the Albanese Labor government has passed a landmark package of reforms in the House of Representatives to further protect Australians from the harms of gambling. We are taking the strongest action ever to tackle the harms of gambling, and the legislation I voted for in the house represents the most significant reform to online gambling in Australia's history. I acknowledge the hard work of those who have driven these reforms, including many across my community. Now that the bills have passed this House, I hope my colleagues in the Senate ensure these vital reforms are passed through the parliament.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 20:00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>133</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>133</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a href="Federation Chamber" type="">Wednesday, 19 August 2026</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">DEPUTY SPEAKER </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">(</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Ms Lawrence</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 09:30.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>136</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Farrer Electorate: Financial Assistance Grant</title>
          <page.no>136</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FARLEY</name>
    <name.id>62329</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Farrer spans 126,000 square kilometres, is home to 160,000 citizens and has14 shires and more than 200 suburbs, towns and rural localities. We are the people who grow the food and mine the minerals and move the freight that underwrite the national economy. The numbers are blunt. The median personal income, net of tax, is $810 per week. House prices sit between $250,000 and $600,000. Meanwhile, the shires are forced to consider annual rate increases of between 50 and 85 per cent. This is not from bureaucratic excess but because the costs of keeping the roads open, the towns functional and the halls standing have been inflated by forces originating not in the towns but in this parliament.</para>
<para>A household earning $810 a week cannot absorb an 85 per cent rate increase. It's mathematically impossible. Yet the alternative—letting the community assets rot—is unacceptable. Most of our inflationary pressures are manufactured within this parliament. Electricity, the clean energy policies—the costs pass straight through to ratepayers. Wage inflation, insurance inflation, superannuation—they're nothing to do with our regional productivity.</para>
<para>There are some structural wounds that we carry. The 2007 Water Act and its offspring, the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, have contracted regional commerce across the shires. Irrigation-dependent towns have watched water be reallocated out of productive agriculture, leaving fewer jobs, shrinking the ratepayer base and hollowing out our main streets. The Basin Plan has exported the cost of its design onto the shoulders of the regional councils.</para>
<para>The financial assistance grant program delivers over $3.6 billion annually across the nation, but it's running in reverse to inflation. Its formulas and algorithms were built for a different Australia and do not reflect the true cost environment for our councils. Every year, the real value of the grant declines while the obligations grow. Post-World-War-II memorial pools are cracking. Town halls and community halls are decaying. Roads and bridges are carrying freight they were never engineered for. Replacing regional swimming pools alone will cost millions. Shires with a shrinking grant and an exhausted ratepayer base cannot meet these renewals alone.</para>
<para>The financial assistance grant must be elevated to a position of critical. The algorithms and formulas are not current or effective for the operating environment in 2026 and beyond. There's the cost of replacement of end-of life-infrastructure. Safe roads are the single largest unfunded liability facing regional councils. We're not asking for charity but fairness. Reform of the federal assistance grant— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Kingston Electorate: Mental Health</title>
          <page.no>136</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have had a long-term passion for supporting people to have good mental health. As a clinical psychologist before I entered this place, it's been a long-term passion about how we can uplift the mental health of our community—their mental wellbeing and resilience. As a member of parliament I hear all too often that people are not always able to get the mental health support that they need when they need it. We have heard about some of the barriers. Where I live in the outer suburbs of Adelaide, access to services can be very difficult.</para>
<para>I recently visited my local headspace, which was something I campaigned on many years ago, and I've seen that headspace continue to go from strength to strength, expanding its services and connecting with young people. But there continues to be a gap in the services available.</para>
<para>So I was so pleased to be with the assistant minister to announce that in the southern suburbs of Adelaide, in Onkaparinga, there will be a new Medicare mental health walk-in clinic. This concept is a really important concept, because it fills a gap that is there—you can walk in and get support when you need it. That early access is so critical. It can stop distress turning into a long-term, chronic mental health problem. Being able to have that access in our local community will be so important, and I'm so pleased.</para>
<para>The other announcement that was made by the assistant minister is equally important: a new perinatal mental health centre. We know that both men and women do often suffer mental health stress and, indeed, mental illness before the birth of a baby, during the birth of a baby or after. It is a very big, life-changing experience that is so wonderful for many, but it comes with a lot of strain and can lead to significant issues, like depression and anxiety. So having a perinatal clinic that is available for new and expectant parents as they transition into parenthood—and then, of course, after that—is so critically important. This will provide specialised support in those critical months following the birth of a child, helping families build confidence and ensuring that they are able to be in a good place of mental wellbeing.</para>
<para>These are critically important investments, they do fill a very important gap in our mental health system in the southern suburbs of Adelaide, and I am pleased that the Albanese government is investing in these services.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Calare Electorate: Community Organisations</title>
          <page.no>137</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today, I celebrate two great cultural treasures of the Calare electorate: the Gulgong Pioneers Museum and the Mudgee Museum. Established in 1962 in the historic former Times Bakery and Produce Store, the Gulgong Pioneers Museum houses one of the nation's finest collections of Australiana. It offers a remarkable window into Gulgong's gold-rush heritage, showcasing domestic tools, farming and mining equipment, horse-drawn vehicles, period clothing, early photographs, heritage buildings, Indigenous artefacts and geological displays, all dating back to the 1800s and earlier. The museum does far more than display objects; it safeguards the stories, hardships, ingenuity and determination of the pioneers who helped shape our nation. Its preserved streetscape and extensive collections provide future generations with a tangible, living connection to our past.</para>
<para>Importantly, this remains a deeply community driven institution. Its ongoing care and success are made possible by the dedicated volunteers from the Gulgong Historical Society committee, and I'd like to acknowledge president Chris Seis, senior vice-president Marie Gorrie, junior vice-president Arthur Johnson, secretary Cheryl Vassel and treasurer and publicity officer Tracy Simmonds, alongside committee members Penny Pinnock and Scott Pollard. I extend my sincere thanks to them as well as to the tireless volunteers, whose leadership, vision and hard work ensure the Gulgong Pioneers Museum continues to thrive.</para>
<para>Just down the road, the Mudgee Museum performs a similarly vital role for our region. Operated by the Mudgee Historical Society, this outstanding museum is home to an extraordinary collection of around 60,000 items that tell the story of the people, industries, cultures and communities that have shaped the Mudgee district for generations upon generations. The success is a direct result of the passion and commitment of its hardworking committee and specialist volunteers. I'd like to acknowledge, in this House today, president John Broadley, vice-president Sue England, treasurer Tereza Wright and secretary Lorraine Stewart—and also the committee members, who work so generously and give up their time: Elick Baynham, Bob Gray, Peter Johnson, Greta Piper, Garry Hobbs, Thelma Meers and dedicated researchers Sandra Sheridan and Lyn Robinson.</para>
<para>The Gulgong Pioneers Museum and the Mudgee Museum are far more than collections of artefacts. They are living records of our region's journey and a testament to the local heritage and community spirit that make the Central West so special. On behalf of this House, I thank everyone involved with both museums for their invaluable service to our region, and I wish them continued success, because, if we don't preserve our history, it will be lost. This is what our museums do. They preserve our history.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>One Big Voice</title>
          <page.no>137</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>That's correct, thank you. <inline font-style="italic">The incorporated speech</inline><inline font-style="italic"> read as follows</inline>—</para>
<para>As the proud patron of One Big Voice, I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations and best wishes to this extraordinary organisation ahead of its upcoming performances at Perth's RAC Arena on Friday 21 August. While parliamentary duties keep me in Canberra, my thoughts and support are firmly with the thousands of children, teachers and volunteers preparing to take the stage.</para>
<para>One Big Voice is a shining example of what our communities can achieve when we invest in the arts, education and confidence of our young people. Each year, more than 8,000 primary school students from over 165 schools across Western Australia come together to form Australia's largest and most inclusive children's choir. This is not merely a performance; it is a celebration of unity, creativity and the transformative power of music.</para>
<para>I want to pay special tribute to Donna Marwick-O'Brien, the creative director and driving force behind One Big Voice. For over thirty years, Donna has been a dedicated music educator in Western Australia, writing and arranging songs that resonate with children and families throughout our state. Her vision ensures that every child, regardless of background or ability, has the opportunity to stand tall and sing with pride. Donna's leadership embodies the values of inclusivity and excellence that One Big Voice represents.</para>
<para>To the teachers, parents and volunteers who have rehearsed, organised and encouraged these young performers: thank you. You are the unsung heroes who make this magic possible. And to the children themselves: you are the stars of this show. When you step onto that stage in a few days time, remember that your voices matter. Your songs carry the hopes of your families, your schools and your communities.</para>
<para>As the federal member for Pearce, I am continually inspired by the values One Big Voice embodies: inclusivity, creativity and courage. In a world that can sometimes feel divided, you remind us that, when we sing together, we rise together. That message is as relevant in Clarkson, Wanneroo and Yanchep as it is across our nation. Although I cannot be there in person, please know that I will be thinking of you all on the day. I have no doubt that your performances will be filled with joy, pride and the kind of harmony that only children can create. May every note remind us that the future is bright and in good hands.</para>
<para>Thank you, Donna, for your unwavering commitment. Thank you to every child who will take the stage. And thank you to all of you for being part of this incredible journey.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indi Electorate: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>138</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When a natural disaster damages essential infrastructure, we should be able to fix it properly. In Fawcett, a small town in my electorate of Indi, residents are still recovering from the devastating January bushfires. Their old timber bridge has been closed since the fires, and last week flooding cut access to the temporary causeway. This bridge was built prior to modern heavy vehicles and needs to be completely rebuilt. The Victorian government, however, is insisting that Murrindindi shire submit designs to rebuild the bridge like for like, but no engineers engaged by the shire will sign off on a repair job, rightly insisting on a full rebuild to modern standards that will be resilient to the next inevitable fire or flood. The result is a stalemate with the Fawcett community, the ones who miss out. I want to acknowledge Sam Hicks from the Fawcett Hall for her passionate and powerful advocacy on this issue.</para>
<para>This is a clear example of bureaucracy getting in the way of common sense and holding back recovery, and that's why I want to talk about betterment funding. The disaster recovery funding arrangements ensure we can replace critical infrastructure after a disaster. But the current framework makes it too hard to rebuild that infrastructure so it's better protected against the next disaster, even though doing so makes financial sense, such as raising the height of a bridge or using fireproof materials. It's like the lesson we learned from our parents: it's better to do the job once and do it well.</para>
<para>Extreme weather events will continue—we know that—so disaster recovery funding should help make communities more resilient. This is not just a Fawcett problem; it's a problem for regional communities right across Australia and was raised consistently at a parliamentary inquiry into the financial sustainability of local governments. Communities from Broome to Bright, recovering from disaster, are having to fight their way through layers of government and red tape just to get essential infrastructure rebuilt for the future. It shouldn't take three levels of government and a maze of bureaucracy just to get a bridge replaced.</para>
<para>Now, I've welcomed the government's announcement that the disaster recovery funding arrangements are being reviewed, and I particularly welcome the proposed resilient infrastructure scheme, which could unlock more betterment funding. I'll be working with my electorate to ensure these changes help us recover stronger and safer. But after everything Fawcett has been through this year, the least this community deserves is for governments to work together to get that bridge replaced. Fawcett can't wait for a government review, because, when disaster strikes, we shouldn't just rebuild what's been there before; we should build it back better so the next disaster doesn't leave the community facing that same problem all over again.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sydney Electorate: Museum of Chinese in Australia</title>
          <page.no>138</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate>Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Earlier this year, during Lunar New Year festivities in Sydney's Chinatown, I was delighted to join the community for the opening of the Museum of Chinese in Australia, a project years in the making and very meaningful to many in my electorate. The museum has now opened with the support of the Albanese government, fulfilling our commitment to preserve and share the long and extraordinary story of Chinese Australians. Located in the heritage-listed former Haymarket library, a building with more than 180 years of history, the museum has been transformed into a vibrant cultural institution with new exhibition, archive and public spaces. This is the first Chinese-focused museum in New South Wales, and it's home in Haymarket could not be more fitting.</para>
<para>When I toured the building in early 2024, it was clear how strongly the community believed in this project. That vision has been carried for years by the museum's founding leaders, including Dr John Yu AC and Daphne Lowe-Kelley, who have long championed the importance of preserving Chinese Australian history. For generations, Chinese values of tenacity and hospitality have been part of Sydney's cultural and economic fabric.</para>
<para>The Albanese government has invested $2.6 million in the museum's fit-out and refurbishment, delivering on the election commitment, the Foreign minister and I announced during our visit in April 2025. With the additional support from the City of Sydney, the New South Wales government and the personal generosity of many including the Pang sisters, this museum stands as a testament to what genuine partnership can achieve.</para>
<para>At the opening, the Prime Minister reflected on the remarkable contribution, ambition and hard work of Chinese Australians, qualities that have helped build our nation from before the gold rush till today. Their story is a vital thread in our national identity, and this museum ensures that it is recognised and celebrated for years to come. Labor understands that Australia's diversity is one of our greatest strengths, and this museum embodies that belief. It preserves the stories, struggles and achievements of Chinese Australians and reminds us of the central place they hold in our shared history. The location in Chinatown is a place where Chinese culture, hard work and creativity have flourished for generations, and those values continue to enliven our city.</para>
<para>MOCA is more than a museum. Through its exhibitions, education programs and community outreach, it brings us together and builds understanding. It offers all Australians a place to learn and celebrate the history and heritage of Chinese Australians, whose contributions have helped define our cities, our economy and our national character. At a time when social cohesion around the world is under strain, museums like MOCA unite people. They deepen the sense of belonging and shared pride that underpin Australia's multicultural success. The opening of the museum is a milestone for Sydney and for our nation. It honours the past, enriches the present and strengthens the future we are building together.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Census</title>
          <page.no>139</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to highlight the growing concerns from constituents right across the Flynn electorate regarding the delivery and the administration of the 2026 census. The census is one of the most important exercises undertaken by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Its data informs decisions on roads, hospitals, schools, telecommunications and other essential services. For regional Australia, where communities must often fight for their fair share of investment, it is vital that every person and every household is counted.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, many residents across my electorate have reported serious issues receiving census forms and correspondence. In Wowan, the local post office manager advised my office that numerous residents did not receive census forms despite a census collector recently visiting the area. One resident ordered and completed a paper form, only to later receive a second form from the census collector. When the duplication was raised, he was told that there was nothing that could be done and the additional form had to be left behind.</para>
<para>In the Baree and Walterhall Showgrounds Road area near Mount Morgan, residents have reported receiving no census forms at all. At one shared road entrance in Baree, three occupied properties housing nine residents were entirely missed. My electorate offices in Gladstone, Emerald and Gayndah have also been inundated with calls and visits from constituents seeking assistance because they never received their census correspondence. Rather than simply completing their censuses, these residents have had to rely on my staff to help them obtain replacement forms.</para>
<para>In another concerning case, my office contacted the ABS on behalf of a constituent in Wurdong Heights, near Gladstone, only to be advised that there was no record of the dwelling. This is an established residence in a populated acreage area that received census materials in 2021 and can be readily located on publicly available mapping services. The fact that such a property appears to have disappeared from the ABS database raises serious concerns about the accuracy of dwelling records used for census distribution.</para>
<para>These problems have been compounded by the ongoing reduction of services in rural and regional Australia. The closure of Australia Post outlets and the reduced access to face-to-face services make it harder for residents to receive important government correspondence and support. For many people in the bush, the local post office is more than a place to collect mail; it is a vital community service. I call on the Australian Bureau of Statistics to urgently investigate these shortcomings, ensure all eligible households are properly identified and serviced, and provide confidence that regional Australians are not being left behind.</para>
<para>When it comes to the census, every person counts, every community matters, and every Australian deserves to be counted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wyndham Learning Festival, Lalor Electorate: Sport</title>
          <page.no>139</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On Friday evening, I had the absolute pleasure of attending the launch and the opening for the annual Wyndham Learning Festival at the Wyndham Cultural Centre. It was an absolutely lovely evening. The Wyndham Community & Education Centre support this event in conjunction with Wyndham City Council. I was also thrilled to see—there are a lot of 'Wyndhams' in these sentences!—Wyndham Central College, my old school, where I was principal, performing and providing the musical accompaniment for the evening. It was absolutely fabulous to be showcasing that wonderful music department at Wyndham Central College. I got to hear a few numbers from one of the school captains of the day. It was a wonderful experience.</para>
<para>I also learnt about something terrific that's happening in our libraries. Wyndham libraries had a presentation in the foyer at this event where I met a young man who's started a business providing digital books to our local libraries. That is absolutely fabulous and a new innovation for those locally who don't want to take a hardcopy of a book out but may want to borrow a digital book.</para>
<para>Across the western suburbs of Melbourne—across Melbourne, in fact—the football and netball seasons are coming to the finals. On Saturday I was pleased to attend Werribee's last game of the season, against Sandringham. We ran out winners on the day. Jack Riding was best on ground with 27 possessions and five goals. Sandringham beat us in the first round, so it was really nice to finish the season with a big win. That leaves us finishing second, behind Geelong, as we roll into those VFL finals. We'll have a break this week and be playing the following week.</para>
<para>There are football and netball finals across the WRFL in my community, as well as in the GDFL. We've got lots of teams and clubs ramping it up for finals, from the under-10s all the way through to the seniors. I want to wish all of the teams in the finals good luck in the coming weeks. I'll get to as many of those finals matches as I possibly can. I don't promise to get to everything, but I'm hoping this year to actually get to see some of the local netballers in their grand finals.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans, Housing</title>
          <page.no>140</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yesterday was Vietnam Veterans' Day, commemorating the 60th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. In the middle of my electorate I have the Canungra Land Warfare Centre, and my electorate also goes up to the RAAF Base Amberley, so veterans are interwoven into the fabric of my community. From Scenic Rim to Logan to Lockyer Valley to the Gold Coast, veterans have put their lives on the line for this country. The very least their country can do is look after them when they come home, yet this Labor government has imposed an arbitrary cap on allied health care for veterans and their families. Veterans health care should be based on needs not on a bureaucratic cap.</para>
<para>Worse still, the Minister for Veterans' Affairs initially refused to meet with the veterans who came to Canberra who wanted to be heard. It took pressure from the opposition in question time to get him to the table to meet with those brave men and women. If the Australian minister won't listen to veterans, who exactly is he listening to? Australians are entitled to ask: if there's a cap on health care for our veterans, why is there no cap on the Minister for Climate Change and Energy's international travel budget? Labor can find money for ministers to fly around the world for climate conferences but puts limits on the care for those men and women who served our country. That tells you everything about the government's priorities.</para>
<para>The cap is simply wrong. It's hurting veterans and their families. We'll scrap the cap, listen to our veterans and give them the care that they need and that they've earned.</para>
<para>When it comes to housing, Labor has delivered a housing trifecta of failure: fewer homes, higher rent and confidence absolutely smashed. The warnings are becoming a reality. Ray White real estate says Labor's new property taxes could force some investors to raise rents by approximately 30 per cent to cover their losses. NAB has issued similar warnings. Having spoken to local real estate agents in my electorate in suburbs like Yarrabilba and Flagstone in Logan and Plainland and Gatton in the Lockyer Valley, I know the warnings are becoming all too real. Locals on the Gold Coast hinterland and our regional centres, like Beaudesert and Boonah, are telling me that they're under stress from this government. Labor promised to make housing more affordable. Instead, they're making it more expensive to rent, harder to buy and less attractive to build. Since Labor's May budget, Westpac's mortgage applications have reportedly plunged more than 20 per cent.</para>
<para>You cannot tax your way out of a government crisis. You cannot punish investors and expect more homes. Labor's housing policy is simply to tax more, to build less and to make renters pay the price.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Avian Influenza</title>
          <page.no>140</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak about H5 bird flu and what it means for Tasmania, for our wildlife and for our communities. Tasmania is home to remarkable birds and mammals. They are part of who we are. So, when H5 bird flu was detected in birds on King Island and the north-west coast, which my electorate runs across, Tasmanians were rightly concerned.</para>
<para>I want to reassure people that the response has been swift, coordinated and based on expert advice. The Albanese Labor government has invested more than $113 million to strengthen surveillance, preparedness and response capability, including national coordination, stronger biosecurity, public communication and more than $47 million to help protect threatened species and priority biodiversity. This is a One Health response, recognising that the health of people, of animals and of the environment are all connected. The government is working closely with states and territories, industry wildlife experts, veterinarians, local councils and communities. The federal government has also launched a national reporting dashboard at birdflu.gov.au. It shows where the disease is spreading, which species are affected and the number of events in each area, helping people understand what is happening and also respond quickly.</para>
<para>Vaccination is now one part of the response, prioritising species identified by states and territories, especially vulnerable populations in captivity. In Tasmania, the state government has indicated it will prioritise orange-bellied parrots. Other species of concern include our little penguins, masked owls, wedge-tailed eagles, fur seals and, of course, our endangered, beloved Tasmanian devils.</para>
<para>But vaccination is not a silver bullet. Strong biosecurity remains our best defence. Tasmania has expanded surveillance, including wildlife monitoring and testing, and every Tasmanian can play a part. The advice is simple. If you see sick or dead birds or other wildlife, do not touch them. Keep pets away. Record the location, species and number affected. Take photos, but only if it's safe. Then report it to the Emergency Animal Disease Hotline on 1800675888 or through birdflu.gov.au. For people with backyard chickens or domestic birds, keep wild birds away from food and water, clean equipment and follow official biosecurity advice. When visiting beaches, reserves, national parks or farms, clean footwear, clothing and vehicles where needed so that we do not carry disease from place to place.</para>
<para>The risk to human health remains low, but vigilance matters. By reporting sick or dead wildlife, following the advice and supporting a coordinated response, Tasmanians can help protect our precious wildlife, our poultry industries and our communities.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fadden Electorate: Men's Shed Labrador, Battle of Long Tan: 60th Anniversary, Fadden Electorate: Telecommunications</title>
          <page.no>141</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It was great to again, this year, join the Labrador men's shed for their AGM on 28 July. It is a local community group that I'm incredibly proud of. I want to pass on my thanks to outgoing president Gordon Cowser and the entire outgoing executive—Paul Whitehead, Jeff Gabriel and Vince Donahue—for their leadership over the last 12 months. To the new executive team—to Jeff Gabriel, who's the newly elected president; Tony Beck; Len Thompson, who's made a comeback; and treasurer Terry Macarthy—thank you for putting your hand up for the service of this wonderful local organisation. I give a special shout-out to Graeme Laing and Graham Braund, who were both awarded life membership in recognition of their many years of service and contribution to the shed. With Mental Health Month coming up in October this year, it's a timely reminder that men's sheds play such an important role in the mental health of the older men in our community.</para>
<para>As we heard, yesterday was Vietnam Veterans' Day, when Australians are honoured for their courage, sacrifice and service in the Vietnam War. Sadly, back in January, a local veteran from my electorate, Graham Gordon, was part of a group who applied for a $20,000 grant to support the 60th anniversary gathering of the Long Tan Veterans Association. To give this some context, this was in response to an application for a grant program run by the government. These Long Tan veterans had met for their 40th and 50th anniversaries, and many of them are now in their 80s, so this could well be the last one that they attend. Sadly, with no decision months later, I was forced to write to Minister Keogh on 25 May, asking him to urgently intervene with a response so that these veterans could plan their anniversary with some certainty. Sadly, I didn't receive a reply until 17 August, the day before the event, and the answer was no. This application was lodged in January this year and, after my direct appeal to the minister, they just didn't get the support they need. Sadly, this is too typical of Minister Keogh's approach to supporting our well-respected veterans, and it is a shame and an indictment on this Labor government that he continues to hold that position when he holds our veterans in such contempt.</para>
<para>Finally, I just want to raise the issue of mobile phone coverage in Coomera Waters in my electorate. In the modern day, you would think that mobile phone coverage is everywhere for everyone, but, even in a suburban part of the Gold Coast, we still have black spots, outages and, in Coomera Waters, no access to triple zero. I've written to the minister asking for her assistance in intervening to make sure this much-needed service is provided to the Gold Coast residents.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>141</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>During Homelessness Week, I got to stand with the residents and staff of St Bart's in my electorate as we turned the sod on a new social housing and aged-care project. Our government is helping deliver some 56 new homes for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness and a new 80-bed aged-care facility for older Australians, because our government believes that housing is not just a place to call home; it is the path to improved health, improved financial outcomes and, for so many, education, and that's a life that every Australian deserves.</para>
<para>I met one such Australian when I visited Bennett Street Lodge in East Perth in my electorate, celebrating 10 years of operation, and I got to sit in the home of Robert. Robert had struggled for almost 20 years with homelessness and addiction, but, because of the work of the hardworking Australian citizens at Foundation Housing, he has a safe place to call home. He's been there since it opened 10 years ago, and it hasn't just given him a place to call home; it's given him that opportunity. He is doing his Master of Mathematics degree. As he told me about that, it went way over my head, but it made me incredibly proud of the work that Australia is doing to find more homes for our fellow citizens. At Bennett Street Lodge alone, some 328 people have had their lives changed for the better because we've invested in social and affordable housing, and these investments are happening across the country. As I walk through my electorate or ride my bike around the beautiful bike paths of Perth, which I'm also proud to have championed and helped deliver, I see real change happening in our suburbs and on our streets.</para>
<para>In Pier Street in Perth, where I got the chance to go with the Prime Minister and the Premier of Western Australia, we've got 219 more apartments being built in the heart of our city for key workers and for those who need affordable housing. On Smith Street in Highgate, for years and years I heard people saying, 'What is happening with that?' It was this public housing project that had been closed by the former Liberal government but now is being rebuilt—109 new social, affordable and specialist disability homes. On Roe Street, above METRONET—above the Perth City Link that Prime Minister Albanese championed as infrastructure minister—we have 170 new build-to-rent homes underway. I've been to Milligan Street, where we've got 37 affordable homes, part of the Housing Australia Future Fund, which some opposed. But I've stood in the home of someone who's benefited from that fund, and some 2,256 constituents in Perth are benefiting because of Labor's home deposit scheme.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Small Business</title>
          <page.no>142</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAFFEY</name>
    <name.id>316312</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last month, the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia released a report that reads like a summary of speeches that I've given in this building over the last 14 months. The <inline font-style="italic">Small business perspectives report </inline><inline font-style="italic">2026</inline> is based on a survey of 572 small businesses, with a particular focus on rural, regional and remote businesses. In the CEO's summary, the long list of challenges includes rising costs, falling profits, workforce shortages, housing, child care and connectivity gaps. The report lists where government could make a difference by providing simpler, more consistent regulation; faster visa processing in areas of genuine skill shortage; a coordinated response to housing and child care in regional towns; insurance reforms for disaster exposed communities; and a modern connectivity system.</para>
<para>These issues might sound familiar, because they are. I have raised almost all of these concerns myself right here in this place. I talked about housing issues in May and July, regional manufacturing challenges in June, fuel costs in March, childcare issues in March, telecommunications last November, community infrastructure challenges in October and skills shortages also in October. I and my coalition colleagues have taken the Labor federal government to task over and over again for the failures to put regional Australians on the same footing as metropolitan Australians. Around 97 per cent of all Australian businesses are small businesses, with almost 770,000 in regional areas.</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">Small business perspectives report</inline> showed that costs have gone up 87 per cent over the past year, profits are down 73 per cent, 48 per cent of businesses are passing on higher prices because of fuel costs and 87 per cent are having difficulty recruiting. Fifty-two per cent of businesses report housing access in their area is poor, 77 per cent of business owners are reporting that they are experiencing stress, and, terribly, only 18 per cent are confident their profits will go up in the next year. It is a dismal picture, when we're living here in the so-called lucky country.</para>
<para>I'd like to put a brighter picture forward. Instead of whacking higher taxes on houses, savings, investment and small business, the coalition will fight these taxes. Instead of punishing small businesses and families, the coalition will work for an economy that will support them and restore competition. Instead of eating away at our country's economic future, the coalition will make manufacturing stronger and more resilient. Lower taxes, cheaper power, less migration, more homes, while still supporting skill shortages and putting Australians first—that's what a coalition stands for and what this coalition, in government, will deliver.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bean Electorate: Sport, Menslink Great Walk</title>
          <page.no>142</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Those that know me know that one of my favourite things to do is to get out and walk. I'm lucky that, down in my community, I have no shortage of trails to trek, with Farrer Ridge being one of my most travelled. But, whilst I may get out and walk as much as I can, I know I wouldn't be able to keep up with Timothy Fraser, who made his debut for Australia at the Glasgow Commonwealth Games. Timothy competes in the 10,000-kilometre walk and is an incredible representative from the southern Canberra community. In training, he wasn't only able to take advantage of all the paths and trails across Bean; he was able to access cutting-edge facilities at the Australian Institute of Sport, living at the AIS Altitude House—Australia's largest simulated altitude accommodation facility, which supports training for endurance and specialised recovery.</para>
<para>And he was not alone in Glasgow, with southsider Samuel Rizzo competing in the men's 1,500-metre T54. Samuel was able to attend the games and compete in his sport with assistance from both direct athlete support and Local Sporting Champions, and what a fantastic result he achieved, bringing home bronze in his event. Not only do these athletes represent the best of Australia and our community, wearing the green and gold with pride, but they show the importance of supporting our athletes to access facilities and supports so that they can perform at their best. I'm proud to be a member in a government that provides exactly that support here in Canberra.</para>
<para>Going back to where I started this speech, the Menslink Great Walk is coming up soon, and I'm glad to say that I'll be participating again this year. Menslink is an organisation that does fantastic work across our community, supporting young men and boys to make better choices and engage positively with society through a range of education and mentoring programs. The Great Walk has been running since 2021 and involves community leaders walking 140 kilometres of the centenary trail here in Canberra—20 to 30 kilometres a day over a five-day timeframe. It has raised over $1.83 million for the organisation across the five years it's been running. I'll be sure to continue to promote this organisation as I gear up to walk later this year, in November, so that the Canberra community can get behind it.</para>
<para>This year, I'm aiming to do 80 walks in 80 days, starting this weekend in preparation. I know the south will continue to get behind all those that do incredible work in and on behalf of our community.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>All the best for that.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Roads, Victorian Government</title>
          <page.no>143</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>'Just fix the bloody roads!' That is a constant refrain I have from people in my electorate who are concerned about the lack of maintenance, the potholes and the damage being caused to their vehicles by roads which have not been maintained by the Victorian state government. If you want to find out what is wrong with the Victorian government, I want you just to have a quick look at one issue, and that issue is the monumental incompetence when it comes to the $10 million provided by the former coalition government for the Mallacoota-Genoa Road upgrade.</para>
<para>In May 2021, the former coalition government committed $10 million to the Mallacoota-Genoa Road to improve safety on this critical link to one of the most important tourist towns in my electorate. After the Black Summer bushfires, that road was closed, due to the impact of fallen trees and debris, and the resilience of the access road was the No. 1 issue raised by the community in the aftermath of the bushfires when we talked about recovery.</para>
<para>The Victorian government refused to provide a cent for that project, and we were able to secure $10 million from the former coalition government to get the work started. The Victorian government owns the road; it is 100 per cent responsible for the upgrade of the road. And, five years later, not a single cent has actually been spent on the road. It's extraordinary to think that a government could be so incompetent. Even when the money was free, from the Commonwealth government, these incompetent fools in Victoria have not spent a cent on the actual road which was the No. 1 priority for the people in the Mallacoota-Genoa district after the Black Summer bushfires.</para>
<para>Now, if you need to understand why, it's on this letter from the former premier Jacinta Allan, who said to me, in February 2022: 'As you know, this funding was committed through the federal budget without consultation with the Victorian government, and was not tied to a specific scope of works.' These idiots in Victoria have spent five years working on the scope of works! World War II was fought and won in less time. If this Labor government in Victoria had been responsible, they'd still be working out the rules of engagement for World War II! These bumbling fools could not spend $10 million of free money on a road that was the No. 1 priority for the people in the Mallacoota-Genoa district.</para>
<para>This incompetence all stems from one critical fact: the Victorian Labor government has been so involved in the rorts and corruption around the $15 billion Big Build project in Melbourne, they've forgotten about the rest of the state. If they hadn't been wasting so much time and so much taxpayers' money on rorts and corruption in Melbourne, maybe they would have turned their attention to the Mallacoota-Genoa Road. The No. 1 priority project for that community after the Black Summer bushfires was to fix that road, and the former coalition government had $10 million on the table and it still hasn't been spent. Complete incompetence!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Violence: Prevention</title>
          <page.no>143</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MATT SMITH</name>
    <name.id>312393</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Like many people here, I have work-experience students come into the office fairly regularly. I think it's important for them to see the work of their local MP and to develop a trust in institutions such as government and democracy. As part of their time with me, one of the things I get them all to do is write a speech. This is a speech written by Harrison Smith:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Good Morning everyone.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">My name is Harrison Smith and I am a Year 10 student currently attending at Cairns State High School.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I'm from Gove also known as Nhulunbuy in the Northern Territory, currently living in Cairns, in Far North Queensland.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Today I want to speak about something that affects every community in Australia—violence.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Violence is more than just physical harm.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It includes bullying, abuse, domestic violence and crime.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Everyday people live in fear because of the actions of others.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">No one should have to feel unsafe at school at home or in their own community.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">To governments I ask this; How many more lives must be changed before enough is enough?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We need strong action, invest in mental health support, education for young people about respect, provide better protections for victims and create more opportunities to prevent violence before it starts.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But change doesn't only come from government.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It starts with us too.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We can choose to stand up against bullying, include people who feel left out, and speak up when something isn't right.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Even small actions can make a big difference.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Think about the kind of Australia you want to grow up in.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Do you want a country where people are scared or one where everyone feels safe and respected?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The choice is ours.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If we all do our part, we can help create communities where people feel supported instead of afraid.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We shouldn't wait for someone else to make the first move.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We can be that change.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I wanted to talk about violence because I was young I used to get bullied, at school I would get called names.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For the 6 years of primary school I did not feel safe at the time.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I don't want kids experiencing the trauma that I had to go through.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">So lets choose respect over violence, kindness over hate and action over silence.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Thank you Prime Minister and I would like to acknowledge all MPs of the Australian Parliament.</para></quote>
<para>I am inspired by Harrison. This is a young man who wants to lead and wants to take responsibility and wants to drive change. It will be through young men that we are able to change some of the paradigm around domestic and family violence, around the bullying, around the harm. When young men stand up to the manosphere, to the Andrew Tates of the world, we should follow them and we should back them in. He is a very brave and special bloke. He was an absolute joy in the office, and we will back him 100 per cent of the way, because, when men stand up, that's how we effect change in other men.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: Lion Property Group</title>
          <page.no>144</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to formally present Lion Property Group parliamentary e-petition No. EN10182, which has been considered by the petitions committee and found to be in order. The principal petitioner is Sonja Boric, a passionate advocate for victims of the Lion Property Group Ponzi scheme collapse, which left thousands of mum-and-dad investors out in the cold, to the tune of $122.5 million. These innocent Australians, through no fault of their own, have been robbed of their life savings, their financial security and their retirement safety net.</para>
<para>ASIC had been alerted to concerns about Lion's conduct for years prior to the collapse, without taking protective action, despite a later Supreme Court finding it was an unlicensed managed investment scheme. Following the collapse, claimants sought compensation under the Commonwealth's Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration, CDDA, on the basis that ASIC's handling of the matter amounted to defective administration. To date, their requests have been denied.</para>
<para>Sonja's petition has gathered the signatures of 2,057 individuals, which I believe truly shows the scale of the issue. I first spoke to Sonja as part of my former role as the shadow minister for financial services, and, while I no longer hold that office, I'm here to follow through on the conversations that were started at the time.</para>
<para>For more than 11 years, Australians alleging defective administration by ASIC have been denied access to the Commonwealth's CDDA framework. ASIC is currently the only entity not formally included in the CDDA framework. I believe this is an opportunity for us as a parliament to do what is right for these victims and others like them.</para>
<para>To be clear, this petition is not asking parliament to determine individual compensation. It simply asks that the House be made aware that the Commonwealth compensation scheme publicly represented as available to citizens harmed by defective administration has in practice been unavailable to anyone raising it against ASIC for over a decade, and parliament has been made aware of this through a Senate inquiry.</para>
<para>On behalf of the 2,057 Australians represented here in this petition, I request that the government take the necessary steps to resolve the pathway for Australians alleging defective administration by ASIC, to ensure that they have the same access to assessment, determination and review processes as claimants concerning other Commonwealth entities. I present the petition to the House.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The petition read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">For more than 11 years, Australians alleging defective administration by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) have been denied access to the Commonwealth's Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration (CDDA) framework on the same basis as claims concerning other Commonwealth entities. Despite 1000's of written requests to Treasury, ASIC, Ministers and Parliament, no publicly identified legislative instrument or statutory provision has been produced that expressly excludes ASIC-related claims from the scheme. The result is that affected Australians are denied access to a process designed to determine whether defective administration occurred and whether compensation should be considered. This raises serious concerns regarding transparency, accountability, equal treatment and access to review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We therefore ask the House to We therefore ask the House to e therefore ask the House of Representatives to investigate the ongoing exclusion of ASIC-related claims from the CDDA framework, require the Government to identify the legal authority relied upon for that position, require the Secretary of the Treasury to publicly account for the matter, and ensure Australians alleging defective administration by ASIC have the same access to assessment, determination and review processes as claimants concerning other Commonwealth entities.</para></quote>
<para>from 2,057 citizens (Petition No. EN10182)</para>
<para>Petition received.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Youth Parliament</title>
          <page.no>145</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This week we have welcomed in members of the National Youth parliament, and we have also recently been sharing the My First Speech competition with local years 10 to 12 in my electorate. However, one very special member of my community wrote to me with frustration that, as a year 5 student, he wasn't eligible for this speech competition. As a result, I'd like to take the opportunity to share with you a speech from Tristan Ong—no relation—a wonderful young leader in my electorate who aspires to be a lawyer and one day a parliamentarian. He says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Dear Speaker, My name is Tristan Ong from Year 5 Doncaster Gardens Primary School.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I rise today to speak on the importance of supporting our young athletes and strengthening community well-being through sports mindset development, and health investment.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Today, many young athletes face increasing pressure from school, sports and everyday life. Around 39% of young Australians experience a mental health problem each year, and one in three face stress during injuries, competitions and tryouts.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Our local MP Gabriel NG—</para></quote>
<para>Thanks for the shout-out, Tristan—</para>
<quote><para class="block">also visited young athletes in local sporting clubs, encouraging them to work hard and believe in themselves.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">These interactions result in lasting effect on a young person's confidence and well-being. Government investment has reinforced the value of community sport, with $3.5 million allocated to rebuilding Bulleen Boomers stadium and a significant commitment funding to Nunawading Indoor Sports Centre.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">While these projects are important, facilities alone are not enough. We must also invest in the well-being of the young people who use them, ensuring they have the support and guidance needed to reach their full potential.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Recently, the Bulleen Boomers Basketball Club hosted an RUOK? Day event encouraging players, families and the community to check in on one another and raise awareness on mental health in sport.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From my own experience, I recently sustained an injury during a game. I had to visit the GP, then go for an ultrasound, and some of the costs had to be paid out of pocket. My recovery will also need follow-ups with a physiotherapist.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Honestly, it was a bit stressful physically and emotionally, as I worry about missing training, games and being left behind.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That is why I believe a strengthening and positive mindset program, in addition to medical and recovery support, will really help young athletes like me.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">By creating a clear pathway to services and ongoing care, we'll help young athletes stay healthy, active and motivated while reducing future mental health challenges, chronic disease, and social issues.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If we can coordinate care for chronic physical conditions, then we can, and must, do the same for young athletes' mental and physical well-being.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Prevention is always more powerful than a crisis response. I'll provide further details on how this plan could be implemented, should it receive support through the funding process.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">When we invest in young athletes today, we invest in healthy individuals, stronger communities and a brighter future for Australia.</para></quote>
<para>Thank you, Tristan, for your fantastic speech and keep dreaming big.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well done, Tristan, and I give the call to the member for Groom.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lester, Hon. Vincent Patrick (Vince), OAM</title>
          <page.no>146</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the passing of a great man and a great friend, Vince Lester. Vince's public service began well before he entered parliament. He was a master baker in Claremont, served on the Belyando shire council and on the Clermont Hospital board. He worked in regional tourism and was part of the committee involved in establishing the new town of Moranbah. In 1974, he was elected to the Queensland Parliament and what followed was an extraordinary 30 years of parliamentary service representing three electorates: Belyando, Peak Downs and finally Keppel. Vince served as a minister through much of the 1980s with responsibility for employment, industrial affairs, training and small business, and briefly as police minister. Later, in opposition, he was the chair of the parliamentary criminal justice committee, served as opposition whip and, towards the end of his career, as the shadow minister for seniors and volunteers.</para>
<para>But titles simply don't do Vince justice; his elections do. When Peak Downs disappeared in a redistribution, Vince moved to the newly created seat of Keppel—notionally, Labor territory. He went in and he won it. He then held it through the One Nation surge of '98 and, remarkably, through the Beattie landslide of 2001. You don't survive political tides like that just because you're riding the party brand. He was a good man and people knew it. He survived those things because people know you, they trust you and they believe that you'll fight for them. Sorry, I'm going to get emotional.</para>
<para>We come to this place to do good. We come to this place to look after people, to represent our communities. We come to this place to hopefully to take their words and put them into these green books so that they're there forever so Australia can take a reflection of where it wants to go and make a better version of itself. In every way, Vince Lester was a representation of that. He encouraged young politicians like me to get out and doorknock, to get out and talk to people, to listen. He had this line that he gave me: 'Ask people what they want to change about Australia and just let them talk to you and take it all in.' It's a great way to start a career, having someone like that, who just puts their hand on your shoulder and says: 'It's alright, mate. This is how you're going to do it—door by door. Just get out there and talk to people.' Goodness me! I look at the state of Australian politics and I think that's something we need more of: good politicians—and there are great politicians on both sides; I'm not making a statement to the contrary. Vince believed that as well. We're all Australians here, and there's something good about that. But getting out there and listening to people is what Vince Lester did. To his wife, Mary, his daughters Veronica and Mary-Ann—God, my heart breaks. He was such a good man.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Vale, Vince Lester.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wellington, Uncle Ivan, AO</title>
          <page.no>146</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a great privilege for me to stand in this chamber and speak about my good friend and our community stalwart in Macarthur, Uncle Ivan Wellington. I've known many people of importance throughout my life, but there are very few whose importance is due primarily to their incredible character, their generosity of spirit and their community support. Uncle Ivan Wellington is one such person. He leaves a lasting positive impression on everyone he meets, and the deep wisdom and commitment he has for local Indigenous history and community support is second to none.</para>
<para>Before moving to Macarthur over 30 years ago, Uncle Ivan was born in Kaiama on 25 August 1946. He grew up with six brothers and sisters in a mission on the Shoalhaven on Jerrinja lands. They were known as saltwater people. This reflects Uncle Ivan's salt-of-the-earth persona. He is renowned throughout the Macarthur region for his warm, beautiful spirit and his willingness to live a life of service to the community. I've had the pleasure of knowing Uncle Ivan for the 30 years he's lived in our region, and have worked alongside him to deliver better outcomes for our Indigenous community, particularly in the healthcare space, through the work that he and others have done for First Nations people of Macarthur in our wonderful Tharawal Aboriginal Corporation with his great mate Uncle Darryl Wright, and Melinda Bell and her team at Tharawal.</para>
<para>Uncle Ivan is renowned for his extraordinary smoking ceremonies and his welcomes to country which, every time I see them, I love. They always make us feel good about the place that we come from, the place where we live. He always uses the fresh eucalyptus leaves that the children from Tharawal have helped him pick from the trees that house koalas in my electorate. It is the most incredible welcoming scent that I will forever remember. Aside from being a man of incredible strength and warmth, Uncle Ivan has a tremendous sense of humour. On countless occasions, his ability to crack a joke and lighten the mood is really wonderful for all to see. Uncle Ivan has the wisdom that comes from a life of experience and service, and he has always been someone people can turn to, whether they need advice, encouragement, a laugh or simply someone who's willing to listen to them. He's a wonderful man. In 2021, he was made the Campbelltown Citizen of the Year. He has an Order of Australia. He is a wonderful, wonderful man. Ahead of his birthday next week, and on behalf of the Macarthur community, I wish Uncle Ivan a wonderful, wonderful and happy birthday.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gellibrand Electorate: Avian Influenza</title>
          <page.no>147</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WATTS</name>
    <name.id>193430</name.id>
    <electorate>Gellibrand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My community in Melbourne's west is a bayside community. Our way of life is connected to the water and the wetlands that connect to it. It's a paradise for twitchers, home to Ramsar Wetlands, the Hobsons Bay Wetlands Centre and the Western Treatment Plant. We welcome sharp-tailed sandpipers and red-necked stints all the way from Siberia to Melbourne's west every year, so the arrival of H5 bird flu in Australia has been disturbing for many people of my community. Members of our community have in recent days seen locals reporting dead birdlife in our community on our local online Facebook groups. It's a very upsetting and confronting thing for people to see. Unfortunately, testing has confirmed that H5 bird flu in wild seabirds in Australia and in Victoria, and detections have been confirmed across Australia. Sadly, Victoria has confirmed the first death of a little penguin with H5 bird flu on Phillip Island.</para>
<para>I know much of our community values connections with birdlife in the wetlands, and the wetlands and ocean life are a core part of our identity. There are many passionate people across our community who contribute to maintaining our environment and enjoying seeing the birdlife. If you see sick or dead birdlife, it is important that you do not touch sick or dead birds or animals. Avoid all contact and keep your distance. Record the date, time and location; take photos if it's safe to do so; and report it to the Emergency Animal Disease Hotline on 1800675888. I want to emphasise it's important to keep your pets away from sick or dead wildlife. Particularly, I'm calling out to the local dog walkers on our beaches and in our wetlands: keep your pets away from sick or dead birds.</para>
<para>I want to thank everyone in my community who's already been taking these steps. I've spoken about this issue directly with the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Sadly, Australians should be prepared to see more spread and larger numbers of wildlife sick or dead.</para>
<para>H5 bird flu is spreading through the wildlife in the natural environment. Sadly, it's not possible to avoid significant losses, which we're starting to see now. This is why our government has been taking action to strengthen our nation's preparedness for bird flu, investing more than $47 million to protect our most at-risk native species, including supporting a major push to vaccinate the more than 5,000 little penguins in Victoria, with wildlife officers carrying out vaccinations at Phillip Island and in St Kilda.</para>
<para>Members of the community can stay up to date with the bird flu outbreak on the new national bird flu reporting dashboard at birdflu.gov.au. The dashboard provides the latest national information on H5 bird flu events, including where the disease is occurring, affected species and changes over time. If any members of my community want more information about how our government is responding to this event and what you can do to be part of this national effort, please contact my office. We'll be very happy to support.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>147</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>147</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7458" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>147</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the important Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026, and it is a very important bill. Illicit tobacco is a significant risk to our nation's public health and community safety—as indeed is smoking and vaping. By passing this legislation, our government will be helping tackle this major scourge on our society.</para>
<para>I've been involved in antitobacco campaigns for many years, particularly in the seventies and eighties. There was the BUGA-UP campaign, which people may have heard of—or maybe not, given that I'm getting older! BUGA-UP was the Billboard Utilising Graffitists Against Unhealthy Promotions campaign. It ran against tobacco advertising in the seventies and eighties, often led by health people. In particular there was a doctor who was a member of the Greens in the upper house of New South Wales, Arthur Chesterfield-Evans, who led that BUGA-UP campaign. And it worked: we did eventually get rid of tobacco advertising. Thanks to Nicola Roxon, the Labor attorney-general, we were able to get rid of tobacco advertising on cigarette packets etc. We went to plain packaging. We've done incredibly well in our antitobacco campaigns, and our smoking rates are amongst the lowest in the world.</para>
<para>But there are dangers. The dangers are, at least partly, the illicit tobacco trend. Tobacco, often as part of organised criminal networks, is coming into the country. It's being sold without the excise payments, so it's very cheap, and that encourages people to smoke. South-west Sydney, my electorate, has a growing illicit tobacco problem that's only getting worse. We have really dodgy businesses with blacked out windows or limited shelf stock pretending to be cafes or pretending to be corner shops dotted all around the region providing cheap and dangerous illicit tobacco to anyone and everyone. I've heard many members in this House note that they're experiencing the same thing in their electorate, including the member for Moore, noting that his Western Australian electorate experiences the same issue. It shows that, from South Western Sydney, across the Nullarbor and into Western Australia, illicit tobacco is a major concern for our country, and such a large issue requires a national response as well as a state response. So our federal government is acting to support the states and territories and strengthen their fight against illicit tobacco with this bill.</para>
<para>Let me make this quite clear: those that are calling for reductions in excise payments are really just requesting that we increase our smoking rates. We need to make sure that the price signal we're giving people with our excise on tobacco is quite clear and discourages people from smoking. Reductions in excise will only increase smoking rates. We need to police our excise system appropriately at both the federal and state level. We need to get rid of organised crime. We need to attack them on their business models. And we need to put resources into this. If it's not tobacco, organised crime will go to something else. It'll go to illicit alcohol or some other illicit product. Organised crime needs to be confronted, not supported, and cuts to excise are not the answer.</para>
<para>I've heard lots of people talking about excise reductions, but it's important to note that our anti-smoking campaigns are working, that we are actually getting reductions in our smoking rates, particularly in high-risk communities, like Indigenous communities. Figures just released by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare have shown that, most recently. Smoking rates are coming down. Smoking rates are much, much lower than when I was a medical student and a young resident. We were always seeing people with lung cancer or chronic obstructive airways disease presenting to our emergency departments, hospitalised and, in fact, dying. Respiratory wards were always full of people with these illnesses, who were dying from the effects of smoking. We've reduced it hugely. We've dropped our smoking rates from over 30 per cent to now under 12 per cent and 13 per cent in many communities—fantastic effort; we need to keep it up. We do not need to encourage more smoking.</para>
<para>At the moment, major crime organisations from abroad working with criminal groups and exploitative businesses here are reaping huge profits off the poor health and suffering of other Australians. Their cheap, nasty tobacco is being sold to vulnerable people here, with profits being siphoned offshore, whilst we're left to deal with the crime, poor health outcomes and tax avoidance involved in the illicit tobacco trade. Our government is doing as much as it possibly can to reduce this trade. We need to give less income to these criminal groups. We need to bolster public health services and law enforcement as well, to make sure that organised crime and illicit tobacco disappear.</para>
<para>I'd like to speak on these three issues: firstly, the health consequences; secondly, the criminal consequences; and, thirdly, the financial consequences of illicit tobacco. Firstly, the health consequences—for years, we've seen a significant shift away from tobacco consumption, particularly in younger generations. That's really important, because, the earlier you start smoking, the more likely you're going to get major respiratory damage with chronic obstructive airways disease, and the more at risk you will be of lung cancer. We need better awareness programs through education and social awareness.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, the rise of illicit tobacco on our streets means we're seeing a shift backwards to younger people smoking, particularly young females. The more young Australians and even middle-aged Australians there are who once didn't smoke but are now accessing tobacco products and getting addicted to cheap and nasty cigarettes and vapes, the more damage that's going to cause to our health system and to our productivity. On average, 66 Australians still die every day from the effects of smoking. That's a huge number. It's in every state, in every hospital, in every health service. And 20 per cent of the nation's cancer burden comes from the effects of smoking. That includes not just lung cancer but breast cancer, bowel cancer, prostate cancer, bladder cancer—all risks are increased. Oesophageal cancer, I should also say, is a rapidly increasing cancer in Australia. These are from the effects, at least partly, of tobacco related products.</para>
<para>Two of every three long-term smokers will die of a tobacco related illness. As of last August, illicit cigarettes now comprise about half of the cancer-inducing products sold to Australia's 2.7 million smokers. We need to get that number down, and that means controlling illicit tobacco.</para>
<para>This doesn't include also the many Australians who have reduced work or health capacity due to the implications of smoking or those that are presenting to our health services—often time and time again—because of chronic lung disease. This has huge health and economic consequences for our country and our health services.</para>
<para>This leads me to the criminal consequences. Our law enforcement agencies are doing a fantastic job in shutting down and tackling illicit tobacco operations, imports and sales all around the country. Recently, we had many of the well-known Metro service stations closed down for selling illicit tobacco products. It's a difficult challenge. No-one is saying it's not a difficult challenge.</para>
<para>Transnational organised crime groups from around the world, including those from the Middle East, South-East Asia and the Pacific, are flooding our market. They are being led domestically by local criminal organisations via the not-too-disguised black market. You can walk down many of our local high streets and see illicit tobacco openly, or semi-openly, being sold. Recently, a local barber shop that I used to go to was closed down for selling illicit tobacco—shocking.</para>
<para>Our law enforcement agencies are doing their best, but we need to support them and we need to fund them appropriately. In particular, we need to fund their intelligence organisations looking at the business models of these criminal groups. They can be caught. They can be caught by looking at their income. They can be caught by looking at their assets. They can be caught by looking at their taxation records—or non-records—similar to the way Al Capone was caught in the virtual Wild West of the speak-easy age in America. It's a difficult challenge, I agree, but these people can be caught. We need to work hard at it.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, some of these groups from the Middle East and South-East Asia have caused violent criminal acts that have the potential to damage innocent victims and cause destruction and distress in our communities—and they already are, particularly in areas of Sydney and Melbourne. This includes, as we've already seen, episodes of torture and even kidnappings. We saw recently a completely innocent and very elderly man killed by these criminal groups.</para>
<para>We have seen firebombings. They require enormous response time and effort from our police services. We need to make sure we support police and fund them appropriately. In fact, there have been over 175 firebombings of tobacco shops in Australian communities in the last three years. This includes those that are linked to the illicit tobacco trade. Also, violent robberies have grown by more than 150 per cent in Victoria since February 2024 due to tobacco related crime. As reported in the ABC in August last year, Viva Energy petrol stations reported a 27 per cent reduction in tobacco sales due to the rise in illicit tobacco sales elsewhere.</para>
<para>I'd like to echo the comments made by the member for Bruce. Australians are sick to death of the sleazy illegal shopfronts and groups that are popping up across towns and cities. They need to be caught. They need to be punished. They need to be appropriately treated for what they are doing to damage our communities. They serve only the black market. They serve only criminal organisations and they will, if left unchecked, destroy our communities.</para>
<para>Our government is working with and supporting the states and territories to shut down the illegal shops and disrupt the trade. But more support is needed from the states themselves. The financial consequences of these issues are huge. Despite the best efforts of past policies, it's unfortunately still quite lucrative for those foreign based criminal organisations I mentioned earlier to flood the Australian market with illicit tobacco products.</para>
<para>This bill will rebalance the risk-to-reward calculation for criminal actors involved in the illicit tobacco trade by increasing the consequences. If this doesn't work, more will need to be done. The reforms will ensure Australia's proceeds of crime regime provides law enforcement with more techniques and the ability to prevent offenders from benefiting from the criminal profits generated from illicit tobacco, empowering law enforcement to hit criminals where it hurts and keep doing it. It will also clarify, streamline and strengthen our existing information-gathering and confiscation mechanisms to increase the effectiveness of law enforcement outcomes. As I've said, we need to concentrate on the business models of these groups.</para>
<para>Getting information to the right law enforcement bodies to respond appropriately is important. These reforms will enable information obtained through proceeds of crime investigations to be shared with other Commonwealth regulators and law enforcement activities. It'll help those regulatory bodies responsible to identify and act against those that continue to assist these criminal actors. These are not benign crimes; these are life-threatening crimes, and they need to be treated appropriately. This bill also recognises the need for a coordinated whole-of-government response to combat illicit tobacco markets. This includes local government, state government, planning authorities and federal government. We all need to work together on this, and we will do so. It recognises the need for all governments to work together.</para>
<para>Further, the work that AUSTRAC and the banks are doing to shut down the money flows that keep illicit tobacco profitable is critical to disrupt the trade. Our entertainment and clubs industry also needs to be involved in this with their propensity to allow money laundering to occur in gambling venues. That needs to be treated appropriately and seriously by law enforcement. There are hundreds of high-risk bank accounts being reviewed and closed down, and suspicious transactions are being reported. This needs to occur in the gambling industry as well, which can be used for money laundering.</para>
<para>Law enforcement will benefit from the modernisation of the existing proceeds-of-crime search warrant framework, and it's important that we strengthen that. When the Proceeds of Crime Act was enacted in 2002, its search warrant framework mirrored the Crimes Act at that point. However, it's now been widely expanded, and this is very important. The amendments would strengthen our law enforcement partnerships and the national response to combat illicit tobacco, and we need to continue to do so. The nature of organised crime and the sophistication of cross-border networks are increasingly challenging, but we can meet that challenge and get rid of illicit tobacco. We must continue to do that.</para>
<para>Calls to reduce the regulatory frameworks and to reduce the excise are ridiculous, don't understand the health consequences and should not be tolerated.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Combating Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026. This bill responds to the Illicit Tobacco and E‑cigarette Commissioner's 2024-25 report, which sets out four key actions needed to combat the illicit tobacco market in Australia. These are: stronger consequences for criminal actors, improved multiagency capability, unified information and data, and demand reduction.</para>
<para>The bill expands law enforcement powers to investigate illicit tobacco related offending, including computer access and surveillance capabilities. It also increases the penalties for people involved in illicit tobacco offences relating to the importation, possession, buying, selling, supply, production and manufacturing of these illegal products. These are positive and much needed steps. In recent years, Commonwealth, state and territory governments have taken commendable action to strengthen regulation, enforcement, licensing and penalties to curtail both legal and illegal tobacco use. Legislative reforms, including the Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) Act 2023, reflect the Commonwealth's ongoing commitment to tobacco control.</para>
<para>The Commonwealth allocated $156 million in March 2025 and a further $20 million in the recent budget to strengthen compliance and enforcement action. The government has also established the Illicit Tobacco National Disruption Group, bringing together law enforcement agencies and regulators at both the Commonwealth and state and territory levels. The group targets mid-level criminals and enablers operating through small businesses, intermediaries and sole traders who import, distribute or sell illicit tobacco and vapes. These reforms have already contributed to the seizure of billions of illegal cigarettes, tonnes of loose leaf tobacco, vapes and large amounts of cash.</para>
<para>But the reality remains that large volumes of illegal tobacco are still flooding the Australian market and ending up in the hands of consumers. The ITEC Commissioner estimates that, at current tobacco consumption trends, the illicit tobacco market now comprises 55 per cent of the total domestic tobacco market in Australia. In addition, it's estimated that 95 per cent of vapes purchased in Australia are illegal.</para>
<para>The enforcement challenge is therefore real and urgent. The rapid growth in tobacconists and convenience stores across Australian shopping strips is undermining years of public health progress. Research shows that the efforts to quit and success in quitting fall as tobacco retail availability increases. Generation Vape research shows that young people are regularly exposed to vaping products sold illegally through retail outlets and informal channels. Disposable flavoured vapes and oral nicotine pouches are being sold from retail shops, with storefronts advertising products popular with children and young people, including American candy and novelty toys. This normalises nicotine use and increases the risk of addiction, reinforcing the need for decisive action to disrupt illicit supply and the retail environments that place young people at risk.</para>
<para>A recent survey of over 5,000 Australian adults, conducted by the Cancer Council's Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, reveals a clear mandate for reform not only to tackle illicit tobacco but to address the sheer oversupply of tobacco retailers across the country. These concerns are strongly reflected in my electorate of Mackellar on the Northern Beaches of Sydney. Residents are increasingly alarmed at the rapid spread of tobacconists and vaping stores across their communities, particularly in the neighbourhood shopping strips and areas close to schools. In suburbs such as Newport, Dee Why, Mona Vale, Frenchs Forest, Narrabeen and Avalon, locals report a surge in shopfronts selling tobacco, vapes and sweets aimed at young people, and when one shuts down it seems like another one just pops up.</para>
<para>Residents have raised serious concerns about the influence of these shops on young people, the apparent ease with which illegal products are being sold and the broader role some of these businesses may be playing in enabling organised criminal activity in our suburbs. One Newport resident expressed concern about the number of vaping shops 'sneaking into our community and drawing in our youth'. They said, 'I really hope you can help and change this increasing threat to our community's health.' A resident of Bilgola Plateau wrote to me about the opening of a tobacco and vape store less than 500 metres from Bilgola Plateau Primary School. They raised concerns about the influence this shop could have on local children, saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Even more troubling is the shop's decor, which is styled like a candy store. This seems like a deliberate tactic to attract the attention of young children, which is both inappropriate and irresponsible. The notion of cheap cigarettes and sweets being sold under the same roof within walking distance of a primary school is not just disturbing. It's unacceptable. What kind of message are we sending to the next generation?</para></quote>
<para>I completely agree.</para>
<para>This is why enforcement cannot be limited to the border. It must also reach the retail environments where illicit tobacco, illegal vapes and other nicotine products are being sold directly to our communities. It's imperative that state and territory tobacco-licensing inspectors have the authority, resources and powers they need to act against retailers engaged not only in the illicit tobacco trade but also in the illegal supply of non-therapeutic nicotine products.</para>
<para>The Australian Council on Smoking & Health recently released an illicit tobacco leaderboard, comparing the progress of each state and territory in tackling illicit tobacco. Queensland and South Australia are identified as frontrunners in enforcement and reform. Other jurisdictions, however, are only just beginning to scratch the surface. Cancer Council Australia has made it clear that coordinated, vigorous and proactive compliance and enforcement between all jurisdictions is needed to protect our communities. This is a nationwide issue. Around 40,000 stores sell tobacco in Australia, despite fewer than 10 per cent of Australians smoking. While all states and territories now have licensing schemes in place for tobacco retailers, and many have strengthened legislative controls, we need to do more—much more.</para>
<para>Divergences in the scope and administration of these licensing schemes have meant that some states have been more proactive and effective in their compliance and enforcement than others. New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia, in particular, have enacted legislative measures to broaden the enforcement powers of licensing authorities and increase penalties for noncompliance. But enforcement capacity also varies considerably across jurisdictions. According to reported figures, Queensland Health has 200 authorised persons, the New South Wales department of health has 78 inspectors, South Australia's Consumer and Business Services has 45 authorised officers, the Western Australian Department of Health has 40 investigators, and Tobacco Licensing Victoria has just 14 licensing inspectors.</para>
<para>Authorised officers who enforce penalties against tobacconists and retail stores selling illicit tobacco should be specialist enforcement officers who receive the right training, resources and support to deal with organised crime. This is grounded in Better Regulation Victoria's <inline font-style="italic">Review into Victoria's approach to </inline><inline font-style="italic">illicit tobacco regulation</inline>, done in 2021. This highlighted concerns that environmental health officers were underresourced and lacked the skills and support to investigate organised-crime-linked offences. This issue was also raised by submitters to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement inquiry into illicit tobacco in 2019.</para>
<para>Consistency across all jurisdictions matters, and we have known this for a long time. At the start of the 2019 inquiry, which began in 2015 and lapsed twice before it was finally completed in 2020, the committee heard that the illicit tobacco market in Australia was 'flourishing'. Chief among the reasons why was the 'lack of coordinated enforcement'. Yet, over 10 years later, we are still talking about the need for national consistency in enforcement.</para>
<para>To stamp out illicit trade, states and territories must have both the legal authority and the enforcement capacity to respond to the scale of the problem in their own jurisdictions. We need firm, effective and nationally consistent enforcement, right now. This includes addressing regulatory gaps that leave our children unnecessarily exposed to tobacco promotion in retail environments. These gaps include the absence of restrictions on the location of tobacco retailers, including proximity to schools, playgrounds or youth services; a lack of bans on child-friendly displays in tobacconists' windows or at their entrance points; and a lack of prohibitions on selling tobacco in shops that primarily cater to children. These gaps present a clear and urgent opportunity to further strengthen tobacco control laws.</para>
<para>Australia's <inline font-style="italic">National </inline><inline font-style="italic">tobacco strategy </inline><inline font-style="italic">2023</inline><inline font-style="italic">-</inline><inline font-style="italic">2030</inline> includes the priority action item of exploring 'options to further regulate where tobacco products are retailed, including regulatory approaches to control or restrict the number, type and location of tobacco outlets'. Restrictions on the number and locations of tobacco licensees was also a recommendation of the Victorian parliament's Public Accounts and Estimates Committee inquiry into vaping and tobacco controls in 2024.</para>
<para>The protection of our children must be a guiding principle of any policy that regulates the density and location of tobacco retailers. This includes setting minimum distance requirements between tobacco outlets and youth focused locations, such as childcare centres, schools and sporting grounds. Internationally, municipalities such as Huntington Park and Santa Clara county in California have implemented requirements for minimum spacing between tobacco retailers of 200 feet and 500 feet respectively. Other strategies include capping the total number of tobacco retailers based on population size—a model used in Hungary, where only one tobacco shop is permitted per 2,000 residents. Similarly, San Francisco has both capped the total number of retailers per district and banned new outlets from opening within 500 feet of an existing store.</para>
<para>The health of Australians must come first. Smoking is a known cause of 16 types of cancer. Two out of three people who continue to smoke will die as a result of their addiction to these products. The real crisis is that, if we continue to allow illicit tobacco to exploit our communities, more of these preventable deaths will occur. That's why efforts to reduce the supply of illicit tobacco must be matched by efforts to reduce demand. The ITEC Commissioner has identified several factors driving the illicit trade, including a lack of consumer awareness about the links to organised crime and the ease with which consumers can access illegal tobacco through retail and online channels.</para>
<para>We must be clear with the Australian public: illicit tobacco is not harmless. It fuels organised crime, it undermines public health laws, it exposes young people to addictive products and it makes it harder for people who smoke to quit. That's why demand reduction must be central to the national response. This means stronger public education about the harms of illicit tobacco and vaping; it means better access to cessation supports for Australians trying to quit; it means ensuring young people understand the risks of nicotine addiction; and it means making sure our public health system is equipped to respond to both smoking and vaping related harms.</para>
<para>The bill before us is an important and long-overdue part of this response. It strengthens penalties, it improves enforcement tools, it supports greater disruption of the illicit tobacco market and it sends a clear message that criminal actors profiting from addiction and harm will face stronger consequences. But there is certainly more work to do. For the sake of our children, our communities and the health of Australians, we cannot allow another decade to pass while criminal networks exploit addiction, undermine our laws and place young people in harm's way. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>People who visit my electorate office in Midland know the stretch of Great Eastern Highway very well. We're at 257 Great Eastern Highway, opposite the Midland Junction Arts Centre, in the middle of a busy, growing part of our community. Midland Gate is nearby. There are cafes like Turquoise and Nellie's where people catch up after school drop offs, where shiftworkers grab coffee and where local business owners know their customers by name.</para>
<para>A couple of years ago, just a short walk from my office, there was a cafe called The Robot Bun Factory. It had personality, great coffee, bao buns, bright colours and the cutest collection of robots, like Ollie and C3PO. Young locals were having a go and building something of their own. But next door was a tobacco store. I'm not making any allegation about that business but, one night in 2024, that shop was ramraided and set alight in a cold, calculated, premeditated act. The ferocious blaze spread, leaving a trail of destruction of over $2.3 million. The cafe was lost, with three other businesses suffering significant damage. No-one was physically hurt, but the businesses never recovered. Two years later, those buildings still sit there, largely still vacant, as a reminder that organised crime doesn't stay hidden in dark alleyways or exist somewhere else. When it takes hold, communities feel it. Local businesses pay for it. Workers pay for it. Neighbours pay for it.</para>
<para>And that is why the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026 matters: because this isn't really a debate about tobacco; it's a debate about whether organised crime gets to operate in plain sight in our suburbs. People in places like Midland know what this looks like. They see the shopfronts. They hear about the firebombings. They see legitimate businesses being undercut and communities being left to pick up the pieces. They understand instinctively that this isn't harmless. Illegal tobacco isn't a victimless shortcut or cheap smokes over the counter. Behind it are organised criminal networks making enormous profits and reinvesting those profits into intimidation, violence and wider criminal activity. When crime becomes normalised in our local shopping strips, everyone loses. Legitimate retailers have been calling for stronger action. Public health advocates have warned that illegal tobacco undermines decades of work reducing smoking rates. Law enforcement agencies have made clear that this is becoming more sophisticated and more entrenched.</para>
<para>Parliament has a responsibility to respond, and this bill does it in a practical way. It strengthens penalties for illicit tobacco offences. It expands investigative powers. It strengthens the proceeds-of-crime laws so criminals' profits can be seized. Organised crime is a business model and, if the risks stay low and the profits stay high, the problem grows. This bill changes that equation, and it doesn't stand alone. In Western Australia, the Cook government has already stepped up enforcement, increased compliance activities, strengthened penalties and given authorities stronger closure powers against illicit operators. That matters because organised crime doesn't stop at state borders, and governments can't afford to work in silos either. The Albanese government and the Cooke government are approaching this the same way: follow the money, disrupt the networks and back the communities doing the right thing.</para>
<para>No-one expects this bill to solve everything, but communities expect us to act. They expect us to back lawful businesses, they expect us to protect public health, and they expect organised crime to face consequences. People in Hasluck don't want criminal activity becoming part of the background noise of everyday life. They want safe shopping strips, thriving local businesses and confidence that the rules apply equally to everyone. This is why I support the passage of the Combating Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026. This legislation matters. It's not simply a question of tobacco policy, and it is not simply a question of the integrity of the revenue base. This is a question of organised crime and, above all, community safety.</para>
<para>It is, as we know, a national issue, and we heard from members who spoke earlier about the shops down the road from their electorate offices. They could have easily been describing my office on our street in Western Australia. Across Australia, people see the visibility of this trade, and they understand that it is not harmless. They understand that, when organised crime establishes itself openly in suburban shopping strips and commercial precincts, the risk does not stop with tax avoidance or unlawful retailing; it spreads to intimidation, violence, fire bombings, arson and fear. That is what the communities in places like Midland are seeing, and that is why the parliament has to act.</para>
<para>Legitimate retailers have real interests in stronger federal action and deserve our support. Theo Foukkare, the CEO of the Australian Association of Convenience Stores, welcomed the stronger Commonwealth intervention against the illicit tobacco market, saying it's 'a crucial step towards fighting one of the biggest public health, community safety and economic threats to this nation'. He said it was 'a big step forward' and that coordinated federal action was 'to be applauded'. The Australian Association of Convenience Stores represents about 7,000 stores and 75,000 workers nationwide, and it recognises that organised criminal networks are undercutting lawful trade, distorting the market and putting communities at risk.</para>
<para>Public health experts have also spoken out. Anita Dessaix of Cancer Council NSW said plainly:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The sale of illegal tobacco undermines decades of public health progress.</para></quote>
<para>That same statement called for governments to apply a 'gold standard of tobacco sales regulation' and argued that stronger retail controls would 'make monitoring and enforcement of illegal tobacco sales easier', calling that approach 'a win-win solution'. We need to defend the public health gains Australia has fought hard to achieve over many decades.</para>
<para>The problem is not going away. Record seizures have occurred over the last financial year, with an over 320 per cent increase in the number of cigarettes seized compared with four years ago. Stronger penalties and powers are intended to ensure law enforcement agencies can not only seize illicit tobacco but prosecute those behind the trade and choke off the criminal profit stream. In media terms, this issue is often framed as 'cheap smokes on the high street', but that framing completely understates the reality. Behind those glossy, paper-thin retail shopfronts sit sophisticated and often transnational organised crime networks which are operating across borders and reinvesting profits into wider criminal activity.</para>
<para>These aren't victimless crimes. Minister Julian Hill has noted that the trade fuels violence, firebombing and intimidation and that it risks the unwinding of decades of success in tobacco control policy lowering smoking rates in Australia. He also said they are not victimless crimes. They harm communities, honest retailers, workers and public safety. That's exactly right and that aligns with the experience in my own community of Hasluck, including the Robot Bun Factory. Leslie and Neil put their heart and soul into creating this wonderful community space not just for those of us who enjoy our coffee and bao buns; they also host comedy nights and beautiful opportunities for local artists to exhibit. And it's not just the space they created for community; the workers have also suffered as a consequence of this firebombing. Annalise, Mae, Ben, Tess, Amber, Penny, Laica, Debbie, Jean, Mark, Serenity, Antia and Amy all loved to work in the Robot Bun Factory and no longer can.</para>
<para>This bill responds to this reality in a deliberate and structured way, and it does two central things. First, it seeks to rebalance the risk-to-reward calculation for criminal actors engaged in the illicit tobacco. And, second, it strengthens the proceeds of crime regime to target the profits generated by that illicit trade. It does that by increasing penalties for illicit tobacco offences; expanding investigative powers, including the telecommunications interception for relevant offences; and strengthening the mechanisms available to seize criminal assets. Those settings matter, because criminal networks calculate risk. If the profits are enormous and the consequences are manageable, the trade grows. If penalties bite, if investigative powers are stronger and if criminal assets can be confiscated more effectively, the calculation shifts.</para>
<para>The bill creates new offences for large-scale illicit tobacco activity linked to organised crime. It increases penalties across importing, possessing, buying, selling, producing and manufacturing. It expands unexplained wealth and proceeds of crime tools, and it enables enhanced law enforcement powers, including wire taps for serious tobacco offences. This is not symbolic legislation. It is practical legislation aimed at disrupting that business model of organised crime.</para>
<para>The member for Canning really needs to get behind this bill rather than moving amendments that he pretends would bring in a better one. This bill is not about making life easier for tobacco companies and it is not about making excuses for the legal tobacco trade. It is about crime. It is about criminal syndicates. It is about the people who profit from intimidation, illegal supply chains and violence.</para>
<para>I also acknowledge that the bill is not by itself the whole solution. The government's own materials explicitly state that there is no single solution to the illicit tobacco market and that a comprehensive and integrated approach is required. That is correct. The bill must work alongside sustained state and federal enforcement, retail regulation, intelligence sharing and coordination across jurisdictions. But the fact that it is not the whole solution is not an argument against it. On the contrary, it is an argument for getting one important part of the response right.</para>
<para>In Western Australia, the state government has commenced significant enforcement action to deal with the illicit tobacco problem. It has boosted compliance capacity, deployed Superintendent Steve Post into the Department of Health, more than doubled the inspector numbers, passed tougher laws with penalties up to $4.2 million for individuals and $21 million for companies and 15 years for imprisonment. In fact, the guy that firebombed in my community has just been charged with six years imprisonment. And it introduced closure powers for shops caught selling illicit tobacco and vapes. The latest Department of Health publication of closure orders lists 63 premises now shut under the new regime, alongside major seizures of loose tobacco, cigarettes and vapes. Governments need to cooperate if this scourge is to be met and dealt with, and I'm glad to say that the Albanese and Cook governments are of one mind in this regard.</para>
<para>Public confidence requires that we act effectively against criminal enterprise conducted in plain sight. In Hasluck and in every town and city in Australia, people are increasingly aware of the visibility of illegal retail operations. They see the shopfronts. They hear about the firebombings. They see lawful businesses undercut. They know that the issue is not abstract. They are properly concerned about whether enforcement is keeping pace, and this bill is part of the answer to those concerns. It signals clearly that organised crime will be targeted, profits will be confiscated and the legal framework will keep up with emerging threats.</para>
<para>It's also worth remembering that this legislation does not stand alone. It sits within a broader national effort involving Commonwealth agencies, state and territory governments and financial regulators. The government's materials describe a coordinated approach involving stronger penalties and enhanced law enforcement powers and tools directed at illicit profits. This coordination is critical because the illicit tobacco market, as I say, doesn't sit neatly within jurisdictional boundaries, and neither can our response. Organised crime networks do not stop at the state border, and the law should not behave as though their operations do.</para>
<para>Legitimate retailers have called stronger action a big step forward. Public health experts have warned that illicit tobacco undermines decades of progress. Independent commentary has recognised that stronger penalties are welcomed if enforced properly, and the government has put before the House a bill that strengthens offences, penalties, investigative powers and asset-seizure tools directed at organised crime.</para>
<para>As Theo Foukkare of the AACS put it, 'This is only the beginning of a long fight.' He is right about that, but it is a fight that this government is willing to take on. We owe that to the lawful retailers, we owe it to the agencies tasked with enforcement and, most of all, we owe it to the communities who should not have to live alongside this intimidation and the risks associated with criminal violence. For this reason, I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise on this really important topic. I'm so deeply concerned about the resurgence of tobacco, of smoking, such a massive public health issue—and vaping—and of course the association with crime. This bill, the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026, is seeking to do three things: protect public health, protect communities from organised crime and protect honest small businesses from being undercut by illegal operators.</para>
<para>Australia has spent decades building one of the most successful tobacco-control systems in the world through plain packaging, advertising restrictions, public health campaigns, excise settings, quit support and strong regulation, and that's a great achievement. But that success is absolutely being challenged by this fast-growing illicit tobacco and vaping market, and I can't help but feel that the government has been asleep at the wheel on this one. We've seen this coming over the last few years, and it has taken too long for governments, state and federal, to respond to this crisis.</para>
<para>The illicit tobacco trade is not a small side-hustle. It is a major criminal market. The Illicit Tobacco and E-Cigarette Commissioner has estimated that illicit tobacco made up around 55 per cent of the total tobacco market in 2024-25, with an estimated value of $5.6 billion and excise revenue evaded—so, lost—in the range of $7.7 billion to $11.8 billion. Those figures should really stop us in our tracks. It's money that should be supporting public services that is flowing instead to organised crime. Now, when you think of those kinds of numbers, $7.7 billion to $11.8 billion, that's a huge investment in law enforcement and other methods to try and make sure we crack down on the illicit tobacco market.</para>
<para>It's an organised crime issue, and it is not a victimless offence. Profits from illegal tobacco fuel violence, intimidation and firebombings, and risk undermining decades of tobacco control. That's why I support the central intent of this bill: stronger offences, stronger penalties, stronger proceeds-of-crime tools and stronger enforcement powers targeted at those who import, manufacture, possess, sell and profit from illegal tobacco sales. But why has it taken this long? I don't understand the delay. If ever there were an area of urgency for the government—surely, this level of organised crime and lost revenue should compel fast action. We know enforcement alone isn't going to solve this problem. It must sit alongside public health education, quitting support, coordinated state and federal enforcement, transparent oversight and proper resourcing.</para>
<para>I think all of our communities are witnessing this. It's an issue directly relating to public health in Warringah. I've already spoken in this place about the concern from parents, carers and educators in Warringah about vaping and illegal tobacco products being too accessible to young people.</para>
<para>I don't understand why these stores are still being opened—why the implementation of stronger controls has not happened. In 2023, I raised concerns that illegal vape shops were popping up in Warringah, with parents deeply worried about vapes in schools and shops operating close to schools. I also called for stronger action on importation, disposable vapes and retail proximity to schools, and government assured us that they were doing that. In 2024, I again spoke in support of vaping reforms—noting the regular concern raised by Warringah parents, carers and educators about young people accessing vapes—and the need for strong national legislation to ban importation, marketing, distribution and commercial possession. The much greater marketing, or information, campaign for people to be aware of the dangers and the toxicity and the risks of vaping has still not really happened. Those concerns have only become more visible throughout our community.</para>
<para>Enforcement action across Warringah has escalated in recent months, but, again, it is piecemeal. In March 2026, the <inline font-style="italic">Manly</inline><inline font-style="italic"> Observer</inline> reported that five stores in Dee Why had been closed in under a month because of illicit tobacco sales, with NSW Health inspectors seizing hundreds of thousands of illicit cigarettes and thousands of illegal vapes across New South Wales enforcement actions. <inline font-style="italic">Northern Beaches Advocate </inline>reporting described local concern about young people moving in and out of shops to buy vapes, and residents saying the problem has become an open secret. And I agree: they're there. These stores are there for all of us to witness, and yet they don't seem to be closed down. This reflects why many parents already know the problem. The legal framework says that young people should not be buying these products, but the lived reality has been so much messier. A product that should not be in the hands of children is too often being sold through ordinary-looking shopfronts. How are they still there?</para>
<para>The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has found that younger people are more likely to use e-cigarettes than older people and that people in the most advantaged areas are among those most likely to use e-cigarettes. Yet we don't have the campaigns explaining the dangers.</para>
<para>Australia has made extraordinary progress in reducing smoking, but that progress can't be taken for granted and, I would argue, it is directly under attack. Nationally, daily tobacco smoking fell from around 12 per cent in 2016 to 8.3 per cent by 2022-23, and daily e-cigarette use increased half a per cent to 3½ per cent over the same period.</para>
<para>Amongst young people, the increase in vaping has been particularly alarming. The AIHW reported that, in 2022-23, around 28 per cent of 14- to 17-year-olds had used an e-cigarette—almost triple the rate from 2019—and among 18- to 24-year-olds, around 49 per cent had used an e-cigarette. More than 87 per cent of 14- to 17-year-olds who used nicotine e-cigarettes obtained them without a prescription.</para>
<para>In New South Wales, tobacco smoking has fallen to the lowest rate recorded. But vaping remains a serious challenge, with New South Wales Health reporting that 16- to 24-year-olds have the highest vaping rate of any age group, at around 20 per cent, and many do not understand the toxicity and the dangers of vaping and the amount of substances that are contained within those vapes.</para>
<para>The problem is therefore not just illegal tobacco in isolation; it is a collision of three trends: a large and profitable illicit tobacco market; a youth vaping market that has normalised nicotine use for a new generation; and organised crime exploiting the gaps between Commonwealth, state and territory enforcement. Some argue that Australia's high tobacco excise has helped create the illicit market and that penalties alone will not solve the problem. I think the enforcement question, especially at the borders, has to be looked at and properly resourced. Price is one of the most effective public health levers to reduce smoking. If we respond to organised crime by making legal tobacco cheaper and easier to access, we risk handing a policy victory to the very industry whose products cause preventable disease and death.</para>
<para>The answer is not to weaken public health. The answer is to make crime less profitable, enforcement more coordinated and quitting support more accessible.</para>
<para>In practical terms, this bill does four important things. First, it increases penalties for illicit tobacco offences, including importing, possessing, buying, selling, producing and manufacturing illicit tobacco. Second, it creates stronger offences for large-scale illicit tobacco activity connected to organised crime. Third, it expands proceeds-of-crime and unexplained-wealth tools, so that law enforcement can better target the profits, not just the product. And fourth, it enables enhanced investigative powers for serious tobacco offences, including telecommunications interception warrants in appropriate cases. This is all in the right direction.</para>
<para>If organised crime groups can treat penalties as a cost of doing business, then the setting is just not right and the law is not doing its job. If illegal retailers can reopen under another name, or if profits can be hidden faster than products can be seized, then enforcement just becomes a game of whack-a-mole and is useless.</para>
<para>This bill is no silver bullet, but it will mitigate some part of the problem—if it's effectively implemented. And that's my big 'if'.</para>
<para>Moving forward, the Commonwealth, states and territories need a nationally-coordinated enforcement model. Criminal networks are importing tobacco through national supply chains, moving it between states and selling it through suburban shopfronts, and they're hiding behind changed company names if regulators shut them down. That means that each level of government owns a small piece of the puzzle and organised crime slips through the gaps.</para>
<para>Stronger powers mean little unless agencies have the people, the data systems and investigative capacity to use them. The Illicit Tobacco and E-cigarette Commissioner's role is important, because it's designed to provide strategic leadership and a data-driven approach across governments—and this is where modern technology will be of assistance.</para>
<para>Public health is also an essential piece of solving the problem. Enforcement must be paired with prevention and information. Young people need clear education about nicotine addiction and vaping harms. Smokers need practical quitting support. Communities need confidence that the goal is not simply protection of federal revenue, but harm minimisation and health outcomes for the community.</para>
<para>On balance, this bill responds to a real and worsening problem, but it doesn't solve every driver of illicit tobacco. It will give law enforcement stronger tools to disrupt organised crime and protect the integrity of Australia's tobacco control system, but only if properly implemented and resourced.</para>
<para>So I support this bill, because communities like Warringah want practical action. Parents want to know that children are not being targeted with addictive products. Schools want support, not another wave of nicotine products in bathrooms or playgrounds. Honest retailers want a level playing field, and the community expects that organised crime should not be able to build a billion-dollar market out of addiction and poor health outcomes.</para>
<para>Australia should not go backwards on tobacco control. We should make the lawful, healthy choice the easy choice: do not sell addictive products to children, do not launder crime through corner stores and do not ask honest communities to pay the price.</para>
<para>So I plead with the government to urgently get a clear, impactful advertising campaign to inform Australians of the risks and harms of vaping. You need to keep that information out and give education tools to every generation—and this younger generation needs them urgently.</para>
<para>So many Australians are simply ignorant of the toxic harm of vapes for those who use them, and for those who are impacted by secondary proximity but also by the residue that falls on every surface where a vape is utilised and extends its harm to third-party contact. How many in this place even know that vapes create third-party contact harm: that, if someone were to enter a house, bathroom, bedroom or anywhere where a vape has been smoked previously, a residue remains on the surface that is toxic to them, and so, if a child or other family member happens to touch that surface and put it anywhere near their mouth or ingest it, they are then at risk? That is the level of toxicity of vaping, and we have not seen any urgent education or communication campaign around these harms. So please—I plead with the government—get proactive about this. Do more.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week, I was talking to a small-business owner in my electorate. Like a lot of local shop owners, he's worked hard for years—long hours, early starts—looking after customers, looking after staff and doing the right thing. He said, 'Dan, I'm competing against people who don't play by the rules'—</para>
<para> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 11:30 to 11:47</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A couple of weeks ago, I was talking to a small-business owner in my electorate. Like a lot of local shop owners, he's worked hard for years—long hours, early starts—looking after customers, looking after staff and just doing the right thing. He said, 'Dan, I'm competing against people who don't not play by the rules, not people who found better business models, not people who work harder, not people who just are genuinely trying to do the wrong thing bu0t people that are selling illegal tobacco, people linked to organised crime, people making huge profits while honest businesses are left trying to compete against products that shouldn't even be on the shelves.' And that's really what this bill is about. It's about fairness, it's about public safety and it's about making sure organised criminals don't see Australia as an easy place to make billions of dollars, because that's exactly what's happening here.</para>
<para>When most Australians hear the words 'illicit tobacco' they probably picture someone selling cheap cigarettes at the back of their shop. But the reality today is very different. This is no longer just a tax issue. It is no longer just a health issue. It's becoming a serious organised crime issue. The Illicit Tobacco and E-Cigarette Commissioner has estimated the illegal tobacco market in Australia is now worth somewhere between $4.1 billion and $6.9 billion. Just think about that for a moment: billions of dollars—not millions, billions.</para>
<para>That's money flowing directly into criminal networks, and those criminal networks don't stop at tobacco. The profits from illicit tobacco help fund other criminal activities: money laundering, scams, drug trafficking, violence and intimidation. Increasingly, we're seeing that violence spill into our communities. We've seen the reports, the firebombings, the threats, the criminal groups fighting over territory, the businesses being targeted, the families being frightened and the communities being put at risk.</para>
<para>These aren't victimless crimes. There are real victims. They're honest retailers who follow the law. The worker whose workplace is threatened, the family living next door to the business that became the target of organised crime, the young person who gained access to unregulated products—every one of them pays a price, and that's why we're taking action. If organised criminals can make billions of dollars while facing relatively low risks, then we shouldn't be surprised when the problem keeps growing. The truth is simple: for too long, the risk hasn't matched the reward. Criminal groups have looked at illicit tobacco and decided the profits are worth it. This bill changes that calculation. It sends a clear message: if you want to profit from illicit tobacco in Australia, the consequences will be serious.</para>
<para>This legislation increases penalties for a range of illicit tobacco offences. It strengthens the ability of law enforcement agencies to investigate these crimes, and it improves our capacity to go after the money. Let's be honest. Organised crime isn't driven by ideology. It's not driven by principle. It's driven by profit. The money is the motivation. If we want to disrupt these criminal networks, we have to take away the profits. We have to make this trade less attractive. We have to make it harder to operate. We have to make it easier for law enforcement agencies to identify, investigate and prosecute those involved. That's exactly what this bill does.</para>
<para>I think it's important that we talk about what this actually looks like on the ground. Sometimes, when we stand in this place and talk about organised crime or billions of dollars in illegal markets, it can sound distant. It can sound like something's happening somewhere else, but that is not the reality. The reality is that this impacts local communities every single day. In my electorate, like in electorates right across Australia, people want the same basic things. They want safe streets. They want thriving local businesses. They want their kids growing up in a community where people follow the rules and where criminal behaviour isn't rewarded. That's not asking for much, but that's exactly what's being undermined right now when organised crime gets a foothold in an industry like illicit tobacco.</para>
<para>When I speak to local traders, they often tell me that they are frustrated. It's not because they're afraid of competition. Competition is part of business, and a good part. What frustrates them is seeing people profit from breaking the law while they are doing the right thing. They pay their taxes. They meet their obligations. They employ local people. They follow regulations. Then they watch someone down the road selling illegal products at prices they simply can't compete with and wonder how that is fair. Frankly, they're right to ask that question, because it isn't fair. That's one reason why this bill matters so much. It's about backing the businesses that are doing the right thing. It's about making sure honest operators aren't left competing against organised criminal networks.</para>
<para>Importantly, it doesn't just target the products; it targets the profits. Anyone who has spent time looking at organised crime knows one thing: follow the money. Follow the cash. The money tells the story, the money reveals the network, the money reveals who's involved, and the money is often the reason the crime is occurring in the first place. That's why the proceeds of crime measures in this bill are so important. If we can strip away the profits and remove the incentives, if we can take away the money, we can weaken the criminal enterprise. If we can make this trade less lucrative, fewer criminal groups will see it as a worthwhile risk. That is common sense. It's something Australians understand. People understand that, if someone profits from criminal activity, they shouldn't get to keep the proceeds of that crime. That principle is widely accepted. This bill strengthens our ability to make sure that actually happens. I think Australians would expect nothing less.</para>
<para>Another point worth making is that this legislation isn't being developed in isolation; it's part of a broader national effort. Over recent years, we've seen stronger cooperation between governments than ever before. The Commonwealth is working more closely with states and territories. Law enforcement agencies are sharing information more effectively. Resources are being coordinated; operations are being coordinated—and that matters, because criminal groups are coordinated; they're organised; they're adaptable; they move quickly. Government has to be capable of doing the same as well.</para>
<para>We've already seen encouraging signs. In some jurisdictions where enforcement activity has been intensified, illegal trade has fallen significantly. That shows something important: these criminal operations are not unstoppable. They can be disrupted; they can be dismantled. But it requires persistence, it requires coordination and it requires governments being prepared to act. And that's exactly what we're doing.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge the work being done by frontline officers, whether it's the Australian Border Force officers intercepting shipments before they even enter the country, investigators tracking criminal networks, or state enforcement officers carrying out inspections and closures. These people are doing important work every day. Often, it's work that Australians never see but communities benefit from nonetheless. When a shipment is seized at the border, that's a success. When an illegal operation is shut down, that's a success. When criminal profits are confiscated, that is a success. And every one of those successes helps make our community safer.</para>
<para>This bill gives those agencies stronger tools to continue that work—not because we want to create unnecessary powers, not because we want to overreach, but because we want our laws to reflect the seriousness of this threat. The reality is that organised crime has evolved—the methods have evolved; the technology has evolved; the scale has evolved—and our response must evolve, too. If we fail to adapt, criminal groups will exploit the gaps. If we fail to adapt, they'll continue to make billions. If we fail to adapt, communities will continue bearing the consequences.</para>
<para>That's why this legislation is both necessary and so important for right now. It's about giving law enforcement the tools they need. It's about protecting honest businesses. It's about protecting public health. It's also about standing up for communities who are sick and tired of seeing organised crime profit at their expense. That's a goal I think every member of this House can support.</para>
<para>I know some people might ask why stronger powers are needed. The answer is very straightforward. The criminal landscape has changed. The scale of the problem has changed. And our laws need to keep up.</para>
<para>The powers in this bill are not unprecedented. We are not creating some entirely new framework. We are making sure law enforcement agencies have access to tools that reflect the seriousness of the criminal activity they're dealing with, because, when organised criminal groups are using sophisticated communications, moving large amounts of money and coordinating operations across jurisdictions, our agencies need the ability to respond effectively. Otherwise, we're asking them to fight with one hand tied behind their back.</para>
<para>This bill recognises that reality. It allows illicit tobacco offences to be treated with the seriousness they deserve. And that's important, because the consequences of inaction are very real. If we don't act, the illicit market grows. If we don't act, criminal profits increase. If we don't act, more violence flows. And, if we don't act, decades of progress in reducing smoking rates are all put at risk.</para>
<para>Australia has worked hard over many years to reduce smoking rates. Governments of different political persuasions have done a lot in the effort to make this happen. Communities have contributed. Health professionals have contributed. Families have contributed. The results have been significant. But illicit tobacco threatens and undermines that progress.</para>
<para>These products are unregulated. They don't meet Australian standards. Consumers often have no idea what is actually in them. And, because they're sold outside the illegal market, they can be more accessible than they should be. That's not good for public health, it's not good for communities and it's certainly not good for young Australians.</para>
<para>This government has not waited for the problem to solve itself. Since 2023, we've invested heavily in disrupting illicit tobacco and vaping products. We've provided $346 million to the ABF to strengthen enforcement efforts. We've appointed Australia's first illicit tobacco and e‑cigarette commissioner. We've established stronger national coordination. We've worked closely with states and territories across this country.</para>
<para>The results are already being seen. Since January 2024, more than 14 million vaping products and accessories have been seized. In just six months last year, more than one billion illicit cigarettes were seized. That's one billion. That figure alone tells you the scale of what we're dealing with. But it also tells us something else. It tells us that our agencies are doing important work. They're identifying these products and intercepting them, and they're stopping them from reaching Australian communities.</para>
<para>This bill helps them even more, because enforcement at the border is only part of the solution. We also need stronger action within Australia. We need stronger coordination, we need stronger investigations and we need stronger consequences. That's why cooperation between the Commonwealth, states and territories is so important, because no single government can solve this alone. No single agency can solve this. It requires everybody working together.</para>
<para>Over the past six months, we've seen significant progress. States and territories are strengthening licensing agreements, they're improving enforcement, they're introducing stronger closure measures and they're looking at tougher consequences for those who facilitate illegal activity. That's exactly the kind of coordination response we need, because organised crime doesn't respect state borders, and our response can't stop at state borders either. It has to be national, it has to be coordinated and it has to be determined.</para>
<para>At its heart, this bill is about protecting communities, it's about protecting legitimate businesses, it's about protecting public health and it's about making sure organised crime does not get richer while Australians pay the price. When people walk into a local shop in Morisset, Toronto, Cameron Park, Kurri Kurri, Cessnock, Singleton or Rathmines, they should have confidence that the business is operating fairly and legally; when families go about their daily lives, they shouldn't have to worry about criminal violence connected to illicit tobacco; and, when organised criminals look at Australia, they should see a country that is serious about enforcement and serious about consequences. That's what this legislation delivers. It's practical, it's targeted and it's necessary, because the choice before us is clear: we can allow criminal groups to continue treating illicit tobacco as a low-risk, high-reward business, or we can act. We can strengthen our laws, we can support law enforcement, we can target criminal profits and we can protect Australian communities. This government has chosen to act, and I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KENNEDY</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We will support the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026, but it only addresses a fraction of the problem. Illicit tobacco is out of control under this Albanese government. I want to read a letter from one of my constituents who recently wrote to me:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am writing to complain about the proliferation of tobacconists in shopping centres near high schools. I live at Jannali. There was only one store and the Woolworths that sold such products. And now two more tobacconists/convenience stores—</para></quote>
<para>for a total of three—</para>
<quote><para class="block">have opened in a matter of months.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">And the new store next to Woolworths has kids toys and lollies and posters displayed and for sale throughout the store.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">There should be tighter regulations on what can be displayed and sold in such stores. And a limit to the number of stores in a km area.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">And these stores need to be regularly raided and checked to make sure they are not selling anything illegal to minors like vapes.</para></quote>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:03 to 12:14</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KENNEDY</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's not just Jannali where these illegal tobacconists have exploded. It's Miranda, it's Caringbah, it's Cronulla—it's across much of the Sutherland shire and the electorate of Cook. Why have they exploded? The tax is too high. The tobacco tax has allowed an illegal industry to flourish. And we are not closing down the criminals in these illegal tobacconists. This is something this bill does not deal with at all. The tobacco tax is far too high, and it has created the space for an illegal industry to prosper.</para>
<para>These emails get to the heart of the debate. Parents shouldn't have to be compliance officers. A mother and father shouldn't have to walk up and down the local mall in Cronulla or in Jannali and see a shopping centre, wonder whether these are stores that are going to encourage their children with lollies or posters to come in for illegal vapes and worry whether illegal tobacco or worse is being sold behind the counter.</para>
<para>I recently had another email from a constituent in Cronulla. She emailed me with dread about one of her young boys in high school who had become addicted to vaping and nicotine because he was being sold illegal vapes repeatedly in the Cronulla mall. If this is a business operating in plain sight, governments should be enforcing the law. That is what we need. Yes, these amendments increase penalties, and we support that. But laws already exist to stop that, and they do nothing on the size of this illegal industry.</para>
<para>Legitimate retailers also should not be smeared because illegal retailers have invaded their market. There's a man outside Cronulla IGA who sells legal cigarettes at a tobacconist. He sells legal cigarettes in plain packaging in plain sight. This man has to contend with being smeared and, even worse, his livelihood being eroded because just out in the mall are multiple illegal tobacconists selling cigarettes at a fraction of the price, with the government claiming zero tax because they're taxing legal tobacco out of existence.</para>
<para>It's not because there aren't some people trying. In the last financial year, the Australian Border Force seized more than 2.2 billion—that's 'billion' with a 'b'—illicit cigarettes at the border. It seized more than 586 tonnes of loose-leaf tobacco. It seized more than 13.2 million vapes, one for every two Australians. This represented more than $4.7 billion in estimated tobacco duty evasion, and we know we're only capturing a fraction of what is making it through. Think about this for a moment: two billion cigarettes—that's what was seized; imagine what's getting through. And we have some idea, because, right across Australia, illegal tobacconists are popping up everywhere.</para>
<para>This isn't a few opportunists taking some duty-free from the Middle East and shoving it in their carry-on or their check-in. What we're talking about here is an industrial-scale criminal market that the Prime Minister has allowed to flourish. And it's not just the Labor Party federally that has allowed this criminal enterprise to flourish. We've seen it with the CFMEU. We see it within Victoria. This Labor government has a problem with illicit criminal activity in the tobacco market, in the construction market, in the housing market. The Prime Minister needs to stand up and stamp this out, for the mothers in Jannali and the mothers in Cronulla who are writing to me at wits' end because their children are getting addicted to illegal tobacco products. I won't stand for it.</para>
<para>Not only is the trade extraordinary; there is violence. The ACIC report that, since 2023, there have been more than 200 firebombings of stores and three homicides, including an innocent civilian—people getting killed over cigarettes, all because this government has put the tax too high. This is why I reject the idea in this bill that we're simply dealing with a tobacco tax compliance problem. We've stuffed up the incentives monumentally, and the Prime Minister needs to admit this and fix it. Shops are being firebombed, people are being killed, we're seeing an innocent civilian being murdered for illicit tobacco, because they have stuffed it up.</para>
<para>I think back to that mum at Jannali, a resident who sees all these tobacconists opening up in the local shopping centre. They see lollies and toys displayed in those stores and they ask a question: who is taking responsibility for this? Well, the PM should. It's time to stand up. This question deserves an answer. Who is going to take responsibility for this? I'm going to fight for you. I'm going to fight for every person in my electorate who's sick to death of these businesses being unregulated and those few smokers who are sick to death of being charged the proverbial arm and a leg to smoke.</para>
<para>The independent Parliamentary Budget Office estimated that illicit tobacco is around 80 per cent of all cigarettes consumed—80 per cent! We have set this tax so high no-one's buying it legally. I've seen local cops in my area going into the illegal tobacco stores to buy their smokes, and I don't blame them, because we've stuffed this up. We've stuffed it up so badly that what we collect in tax from cigarettes has dropped from $14.7 billion in 2023-24 to $3.6 billion, an $11 billion drop in the tax take. Australians instinctively understand something this prime minister doesn't: the more you tax something—the higher you tax something—the less of it you get. That is why taxation revenue has fallen through the floor on cigarettes despite it being 80 per cent or more of the price of a packet of smokes. The higher you make that tax, the less they'll buy it. They'll go around it.</para>
<para>We're seeing that same principle on display in our housing market: 'Let's tax housing a whole lot more; let's set a minimum 30 per cent tax and a maximum 47 per cent.' In some cases, that's double or triple what people would pay, and—surprise, surprise—we read in their own budget papers that we get 35,000 fewer houses because, the more you tax something, the less you get of it. That's true with cigarettes. It's true with houses. Unfortunately, we have a prime minister who does not understand how business works or operates, and Australians are left to pay the price—Australian renters in Cook, Australian renters in Jannali and mums of local high school students at Jannali High watching these illegal tobacconists spring up like mushrooms all over the place. Not only is a mum having to deal with her young son being addicted to nicotine at school; she's having to deal with rents that are going through the roof because we've got fewer houses—35,000 fewer, according to the Treasury's own budget papers. We have a government and a prime minister who do not understand how business and incentives work and operate.</para>
<para>This isn't something that just the coalition is saying. Those of you in Cook would have heard our premier, Premier Minns, and health minister Ryan Park—a Labor premier and a Labor health minister—take shot after shot at this Labor federal government for not understanding this. Ryan Park recently said that the federal government's excise is 'driving the black market'. That's a direct quote. Premier Minns has talked about how he feels like he's fighting with one hand tied behind his back trying to close these stores down, because he knows what all of us know and what every constituent in Cook knows: this crazy tobacco tax at crazy prices has created and driven this market. This isn't a partisan issue. The Labor premier gets it. The Labor health minister gets it. I get it. The mums and dads of high school students at Cronulla, at Jannali, at Miranda and at Caringbah get it. They are watching their kids get addicted to cut-price vapes and cut-price cigarettes from the illegal tobacconists springing up everywhere.</para>
<para>It's the Commonwealth agencies that control our international border. They are the ones that should be holding organised crime to account—and this is what it is: deep, organised crime. They used to sell heroin. They used to sell meth. They used to sell cocaine and MDMA. Now they're selling packs of Double Happiness to 16-year-olds down at Cronulla mall and Jannali mall. That's what's happening. This isn't your friendly local retailer bringing back a few boxes of duty-free. We're talking about 2.2 billion cigarettes seized. That's a fraction of what's getting through.</para>
<para>Parents at Jannali or Cronulla don't care about which level of government or which subsection of the act is involved. They don't care that the penalties you already aren't enforcing are being doubled or tripled—which is what we're doing in this bill, which I support. What they want is leadership. They want a prime minister who leads and stands up for them, who doesn't push a piece of political legislation that doesn't deal with the underlying problem of excise.</para>
<para>We need a serious conversation about where these businesses are opening, how many can be in a cluster and whether they are actually legal, because most of them aren't. I feel for that guy in the Cronulla mall, outside the Cronulla IGA, selling plain-packaging cigarettes to people over 18—not selling illegal vapes—and watching his margins get eaten up by organised crime because this government is turning a blind eye.</para>
<para>We need to be much tougher where operators are caught deliberately selling illegal products. These guys are operating in plain sight day after day, selling to minors. If the penalty is simply to be absorbed as a cost of doing business, because the profit margins are so high—because we've set the taxes so high—that is not a deterrent; it's just a cost of doing business.</para>
<para>For me, the test is much simpler than the language in this bill. Can the parent in Jannali who wrote to me at the start of this bill walk through their local shopping centre and feel confident that the shops around them are operating lawfully, selling lawful products that won't be sold to their children? Can the honest small-business owner know that the government will not leave them to compete against an organised criminal network that firebombs competitors, that's committed murders—murders over a product that should be illegal—because we've stuffed up the tax, because we're taxing you too much? Not only are we taxing you at the highest rate on total income you've ever been taxed in your life or with the highest tax on capital you've ever been taxed in your life; we're taxing cigarettes at the highest rate in the world and allowing criminal operators to operate in plain sight, making superprofits, selling cigarettes to your kids, firebombing your neighbours and, in some cases, murdering the competition. That is what is going on here.</para>
<para>Can organised crime look at Australia and conclude that illicit tobacco is easy money that the government just turns a blind eye to? Right now, I think they look at that and they say yes—yes, they can. And constituents know that because they're living it. The message to criminal networks making superprofits from this trade should be simple: if you import it, distribute it and launder the proceeds, or knowingly sell illegal products to anyone—let alone children in my electorate—the government should use every lawful power to find you, shut your operation down, lock you up and take your illegal proceeds of crime away.</para>
<para>Now, yes, the coalition will support this bill, but it goes a tiny fraction of the way. The problem will not be solved; it'll be absorbed as a cost of doing business by these super criminal networks operating in our community. This is about protecting children, backing parents and honest businesses, keeping organised crime out of my electorate and keeping the kids in my electorate out of the shopfronts of organised crime. We need to restore something basic: confidence that, when Australians see the law being broken in plain sight, the Prime Minister will stand up and act.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank all members for their contributions to the debate on the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026. The bill, to summarise, delivers on the adoption of a collective approach against illicit tobacco. It means that the penalties will reflect, properly and finally, the severity of the harm and that law enforcement agencies will have the new, consistent and expanded powers needed to target the proceeds of crime: unexplained wealth and tainted property. The reforms in this bill are essential to provide safeguards against the illicit tobacco market to ensure that the hard won gains, which have been won by Australians over a generation now, are maintained with respect to the reduction in smoking rates—and we can be proud as a country, as a society, that we now have smoking rates, in the adult population, amongst the lowest anywhere in the world—as well as community safety and economic security being bolstered.</para>
<para>For too long, illegal tobacco has been seen as a low-risk, high-profit activity. This bill goes a long way to reversing that equation, to raising the risks and the stakes for criminals involved in this trade and lowering their profits. It changes the risk calculus of criminal actors, by raising penalties associated with offences against importing, manufacturing, possessing, moving, buying or selling illicit tobacco under the Customs Act, the Excise Act and the Taxation Administration Act, matching the severity of the harms caused by illicit tobacco. I'm sure the member for Kooyong, sitting opposite, as a medical professional would agree that illegal tobacco is not a victimless crime.</para>
<para>As well as profits flowing to organised criminal syndicates, this is a worldwide problem. It's been caused by a surplus of desperately cheap global production of tobacco, often for less than a dollar a packet, that criminal syndicates have industrialised and weaponised, flooding borders of all nations with massive amounts of product.</para>
<para>The bill also amends the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act to enliven telecommunications interception powers for illegal tobacco under the Customs Act, Excise Act and TA Act. That's really important because it gives law enforcement agencies enhanced intelligence techniques, including wire taps, computer listening devices, surveillance devices and so on, to match the severity of illicit tobacco crimes.</para>
<para>Lastly, and importantly, the bill enhances Australia's proceeds-of-crime regime through amendments to the Proceeds of Crime Act to more effectively target the profits of serious and organised criminals engaged in the illicit tobacco trade. This is achieved through the adoption of new and expanded law enforcement powers to target proceeds, instruments and benefits of crime. Put simply, as the Australian Federal Police, the Criminal Intelligence Commission and the state and territory police forces have explained to me directly, prosecutions are important. They provide a deterrent effect and are an important accountability mechanism. But they're also slow and expensive. What really hurts criminal actors and criminal syndicates rapidly is to go after the proceeds of crime—to take their houses, their cash, their boats, their cars, their toys—with the unexplained wealth provisions.</para>
<para>New and expanded powers in the act include introducing a national, broad and consistent protective order power for restraining-order applications, expanding the availability of proceeds-of-crime examination orders where there is no restraining order in force or before a restraining order has been made; allowing information obtained using POCA powers to be shared with Commonwealth, state and territory agencies for regulatory purposes; introducing a person search warrant power; and modernising the existing search warrant framework to align the powers under the Crimes Act. Other POCA amendments include changes to service provisions to enable postal or electronic service; allowing jurisdictions to access the equitable sharing arrangements to encourage cross-border cooperation and better target unexplained wealth; and removing the requirement for a court to make a preliminary unexplained wealth order.</para>
<para>I just want to address a few of the thematic issues which were raised in some of the contributions to the debate. First, with respect to excise—and I listened carefully to the previous speaker, the member for Cook—there's a convenient fact which the opposition, who are now running this line, along with One Nation and big tobacco, seek to overlook—that excise was never about revenue. It was always designed as a pigovian tax, a tax that is actually designed to drive down consumption, to cost in the externalities—in this case, to the health system, like environmental taxes. It was always meant to go up and then go down. The smoking rates fell.</para>
<para>This used to be a bipartisan policy. Excise rose by over 120 per cent under the former government and has risen by around 30 per cent under our government, most of which was to deal with the post-COVID inflation spike. So, to be very clear, excise rose fundamentally under their government, a fact that they don't want to talk about.</para>
<para>I feel a bit sorry for them because they're supposed to be the alternative government and have a considered policy process. A few weeks ago they were talking about an excise cut that was magically going to solve this problem of 30 per cent. Then a little while ago it was 50 per cent. This morning Senator Hanson, I think, said 75 per cent, and then the opposition said 80 per cent. Next week it'll probably be 90 per cent. They found an economist who was quoted as saying, 'Wipe it out.' The week after, they'll probably be paying Australians to take up tobacco. This is not the way to do a policy process.</para>
<para>We should always keep an open mind, right? We should always look at the evidence. But I say to those who say that this is some kind of magic bullet, that this is a magic solution, could someone please put on the table—not just wave around numbers and run the political line of big tobacco but actually put on the table—a number, with modelling, that they think would solve the problem. The truth is you could wipe out excise, and illegal cigarettes would still be cheaper. Countries that have almost no or no excise still have an illegal tobacco market because the criminal syndicates can produce this stuff for less than a dollar a pack. That brings me to the second point; I'll just make a statement: it's not the Labor Party that takes donations from big tobacco. The same can't be said of the coalition.</para>
<para>My third point—and I agree with many of the contributions, those of the previous speaker and others—is that these ridiculous, sleazy illegal tobacco shops that have sprung up in every state and territory have to be closed. It's not fair to genuine retailers, be they big or small; it's not fair to those trying to make a living; and it's downright dangerous for our public health. The ubiquity of the availability of illegal product in strip shopping centres has driven Australians mad. Over 90 per cent of adult Australians do not smoke, and they don't want this stuff in every strip shopping centre and shopping mall for their kids to become hooked on.</para>
<para>I'll explain it like this: despite all the political theatre that we've heard too much of, nonsense that the government's doing nothing, the national disruption group set up less than a year ago is kicking goals. We saw over a hundred service stations raided last week. You've got to think about it like this: it's Commonwealth led with every state and territory police force. You've got to think about it as preborder, at the border and postborder.</para>
<para>Preborder, we're having record levels of disruptions. That's about deepening our intelligence partnerships with foreign governments. The best container of illegal tobacco is one that never reaches Australia. Last year there were over 30 tonnes of containers that were disrupted and never came near Australia.</para>
<para>At the border, Border Force have had record levels of seizures. Over a kilotonne of tobacco was seized in four months at the border. They had a record month in March, a record month in April, a record week in March, a record week in April. But no country can win this fight at the border. There's a flood of surplus, cheap, global production—less than a dollar a packet—that criminal syndicates have weaponised, and they are flooding every national border. Even Singapore, which is pretty well-known for its law and order and border control, has an illegal tobacco problem. Theirs is different. It's not shops; it's motorcycle couriers and WhatsApp.</para>
<para>But it's postborder where the biggest gains most urgently need to be made. The Commonwealth's now invested over the last couple of years $98 million in supporting states and territories and another $280 million or so for Commonwealth enforcement through the Federal Police, through Border Force and so on. We need the states and territories to shut the shops. To put it in the extreme again, if you wiped out all excise—imagine that world—illegal tobacco would still be cheaper. You've got to go and shut the shops. It's constitutionally not something the Commonwealth can do. I understand that some state governments are running a line. It's a good media line to avoid their own political responsibilities to shut the shops. We are supporting them in shutting the shops, but we need more urgent action.</para>
<para>I'll shout-out and praise Queensland. The Queensland government and the South Australian government—it shouldn't be a partisan issue—were the forerunners of adopting the toughest legal frameworks in the country: strong licensing regimes, stronger penalties, immediate suspension of licences for any legal licensed retailer found selling illegal product and, most importantly, long closure orders and landlord penalties. I spoke to a constituent at the member for Flynn's request, and we talked through this. It was the landlord penalties that the retailer in your electorate explained were having the greatest effect, and that's been shown to be the case. There's clear and emerging evidence from industry, from retailers and from intelligence sources that in Queensland, where they're doing proper enforcement, legal tobacco sales are rising. We cannot surrender this issue to organised crime. Now is the time to double down, not back down, and run big tobacco's line.</para>
<para>I want to address, though, a pretty appalling theme that I've heard in some of the contributions from those opposite, and that relates to vapes. The previous speaker talked in emotional terms about a mother who was worried, rightly, about her children becoming addicted to vapes and nicotine from the illegal vapes sold at the local shops. I share that concern. The price of illegal vapes has been escalating rapidly because we are seizing them at the border and shutting the shops. The price of illegal vapes in Queensland has been skyrocketing because enforcement is actually happening there.</para>
<para>But the hypocrisy in, on one hand, rightly observing the dangers of illegal vapes and, on the other hand, being in coalition with the National Party, which wants to let vaping rip in our society, needs to be called out. Imagine a horrible parallel alternative universe where the National Party had had their way—it's still their policy—and had legalised vapes. It'd be a far worse situation.</para>
<para>And I'll finish on this point. Despite everything that organised crime has been throwing at our country and countries across the world, the data that was released a few weeks ago—the gold standard data which has been credible and accepted for over 30 years—from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, showed that, despite all of that, smoking rates in our country have continued to fall, and vaping rates have now stabilised and flatlined. The percentage of young Australians aged between 14 and 17 who have never vaped has now increased.</para>
<para>These are incredibly important gains. We cannot condemn the next generation to the scourge of nicotine addiction. There are those opposite who want to run the 'big vaping' lobby's arguments that, somehow, vaping is not dangerous and should be allowed to let rip. Of course, there's a prescription vape regime, if people feel that that's a better alternative to help them quit. But the proposition that vaping should be allowed to let rip across the country is just an appalling idea for our society. I've been down to the TGA, I've met with the scientists and I've stood with them as they test this stuff. Some of the vapes can have the equivalent of nine packets of cigarettes of nicotine in them. They're unregulated. They're full of chemicals merging with heavy metals. They're not some safe alternative and they're not something which our country should cave in to big tobacco on and let rip right across the country.</para>
<para>So we look forward to the Senate committee's report. We consider everything with an open mind, but I encourage those opposite to regain the spirit of public health bipartisanship on this and actually come to the table with firm proposals, not random changing numbers.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Canning has moved an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The honourable member for Kooyong has moved an amendment to that amendment that all words after 'notes that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Kooyong be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question unresolved.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>164</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7507" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>164</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak in support of Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026. This bill speaks to Australia's international engagement. Australia has always prioritised international engagement: the building of relationships and fostering partnerships and cooperation; the active participation in regional and global affairs to seek to shape direction and uphold international order; and the prosecution of diplomatic, economic and security interactions to the benefit of national interest.</para>
<para>International engagement matters. It is critical for addressing regional challenges, promoting peace and maintaining regional and global stability. Addressing common global challenges like climate change, security threats, energy security, economic inequality and economic prosperity will only ever be meaningful when states engage internationally to build alliances, influence norms and contribute to the balance of power within the international system.</para>
<para>Australia's international engagement is far-reaching, strategic and effective. Australia's international engagement is directed at maintaining peace, stability and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region at the same time as ensuring Australians remain safe, free and secure in the face of growing terrorism and other security threats. Australia's international engagement is also directed at maximising opportunities for Australian businesses by investing in strategies to ensure markets remain open, trade and investment happens, and capital flows into the country.</para>
<para>Australia's international engagement is also directed at supporting the rules based order to shore up the foundations for stability and prosperity so that global and regional challenges can be met in collaboration with our friends, our partners and our allies at the same time as focusing on Australia's sovereign capability and power. This bill acknowledges the many benefits Australia has enjoyed from its international engagement and remains absolutely consistent with and reflective of Australia's national interests. In 2020, Australia introduced the Foreign Arrangements Scheme, which is dedicated to ensuring that arrangements between state or territory governments and their entities and foreign entities do not adversely affect Australia's foreign relations and are not inconsistent with Australia's foreign policy.</para>
<para>This scheme creates an approval process for what are called 'core foreign arrangements' and a notification process for what are called 'non-core foreign arrangements'. A core foreign arrangement is an arrangement between a core state or territory entity and a core foreign entity. A non-core foreign arrangement is an arrangement between a core state or territory entity and a non-core foreign entity, a non-core state or territory entity and a core foreign entity, or a non-core state or territory entity and a non-core foreign entity. What does that actually mean? A core state or territory entity means states and territories themselves and state and territory governments, departments and agencies. A non-core state or territory entity includes local government and Australian public universities.</para>
<para>If we're talking about Australian public universities, the Foreign Arrangements Scheme operates to require notification of a proposal to enter into foreign arrangements, with the minister receiving that notification and having the power to make a declaration prohibiting the entity from negotiating or entering into that non-core arrangement if the minister is satisfied that the negotiation or arrangement would adversely affect or be likely to adversely affect Australia's foreign relations or if it would likely be inconsistent with Australia's foreign policy. Demonstrating the breadth of Australia's international engagement, since 2020, over 22,000 notifications have been received. As well as demonstrating the breadth of our international engagement, this also demonstrates the importance of maintaining appropriate oversight of these arrangements. Managing risk at the same time as advancing partnerships that are beneficial to Australia is the name of the game.</para>
<para>Through this lens, in 2024, the Albanese Labor government commissioned a review of the Foreign Arrangements Scheme, which was led by Ms Rosemary Huxtable. The point of this was to ensure that agreements with foreign countries are consistent with Australia's national interests and also to better equip Australian subnational governments and public universities to manage risk and benefit from opportunities. It was a holistic review of what could go wrong, as well as what could go right. Five themes arose from this review, resulting in 23 recommendations, all of which were accepted by the government.</para>
<para>Firstly, the recommendations focused on how to best strengthen the capacity of the scheme to consider the national interest and how to improve governance and data sharing and provide more coordinated support to entities affected by the scheme. Secondly, they considered how to effectively regulate risk by reducing the number of low-risk arrangements notified to the scheme by exempting certain arrangements, and to reform the scheme processes to more strongly focus on high-risk arrangements. Thirdly, the recommendations looked at the legislative settings following the then four years of scheme operation, and determined that refreshing key concepts of the foreign relations act to improve flexibility and administrative efficiency through greater use of delegations. Fourthly, administrative efficiencies were identified. Fifthly, the recommendations identified a need to increase transparency by improving visibility of scheme data to affected entities, and to enhance the public register as a single source of truth and an authoritative source of current arrangements.</para>
<para>This bill responds to the review's findings and implements a number of those recommendations that were made by Ms Huxtable. Drawing on those recommendations, this bill aims to increase the focus on Australia's national interests by improving risk management tools, and to reduce the administrative burden for low-risk arrangements. In the international engagement space the government needs to regulate, to facilitate and to proportionately manage risk, not regulate to paralyse. This bill strikes the balance in several ways. It strengthens the scheme by directly referring to and acknowledging the national interest, refocusing the act and ensuring the holistic consideration of decisions from different perspectives, including security, economic and foreign policy. It also introduces a disclosure framework to facilitate the sharing of information collected through notifications made under the foreign relations act to the Australian government and other prescribed entities, supporting coordinated whole-of-government decision-making. Importantly, the bill also extends the foreign relations act to include overseas campuses of Australian universities—which we know are becoming more common, particularly in the Middle East and Asia—with a clear and present opportunity for further expansion onto the African continent.</para>
<para>Timeframes for the consideration of core foreign arrangements, which are those entered into by states and territories, state and territory governments, departments and agencies have been extended by an additional 30 days to allow a deeper and more considered review of what are becoming increasingly complex arrangements, and considering these against the national interest.</para>
<para>With respect to streamlining the scheme, the bill does this in a number of ways. It introduces a one-step notification for non-core foreign arrangements. It also amends the notification requirements for renewals and variations of core foreign arrangements to ensure ministerial approval is not required for previously approved core foreign arrangements if the variation in question is minor. It also allows the minister to deem certain core Australian state or territory entities, foreign entities and arrangements are non-core, meaning they fall into the category of notification, not approval.</para>
<para>Although this bill does simplify the Foreign Arrangement Scheme, it does so without compromising effective oversight and without paralysing Australia's international engagement, so that it can continue to deliver strategic and economic benefits to our country, always in the national interest.</para>
<para>One of Australia's great public research universities is Adelaide University, which was formed by the public merger of the University of Adelaide and University of South Australia operating as a government supported institution established under South Australian state legislation. It began operations on 1 January this year and it welcomed its first students a couple of months later. Adelaide University is well on its way to realising its vision of being a leading, contemporary, comprehensive university of global standing. It's dedicated to ensuring the prosperity, wellbeing and cohesion of society by addressing educational inequality through both the actions of the university and the success and impact of its students and its alumni. It has a deliberate strategy to partner with the community and partner with industry so it can achieve the goal of conducting outstanding future-making research of scale and focus.</para>
<para>By 2034, the new Adelaide University is forecast to contribute an estimated additional $500 million a year to the South Australian economy and educate more than 70,000 students. This is about 13,000 more than the existing two universities were educating. It will also create an additional 1,200 jobs. A globally competitive university that is sustainably positioned in the top-100 universities in the world will not only be able to provide high-quality teaching to students of all economic backgrounds but will be able to secure a greater share of funding for high-quality research and to work actively and meaningfully with local business and industry.</para>
<para>This merger, this creation of Adelaide University, a public university, is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for the state of South Australia. It'll be the largest educator of domestic students in Australia and will have the scale and resources to be sustainably positioned in the top100 in the world. Indeed, in June this year, Adelaide University moved up the world university rankings, reaching 79th position, firmly cementing it as a global top-100 university. In Australia, it was ranked eighth out of the other 36 tertiary institutions on the list and second for its international research network. Its focus on targeted innovation and research and development is right. It's the key to unlocking further economic growth and prosperity, not just for South Australia but for the entire country and beyond.</para>
<para>To be placed in the top 100 universities in the world and second in Australia for international research networks is not only an outstanding achievement but one that will enable the Adelaide University to attract more research investment for the state of South Australia. As the new Adelaide University's vision has articulated so clearly, collaborative efforts between academia, industry and government agencies are crucial for pushing the boundaries of research and development. Collaborative research and development initiatives enable the sharing of knowledge, resources and expertise, leading to more robust and innovative outcomes. Well-funded and targeted research and development leads to improvements in social welfare, quality of life, environmental sustainability, economic growth and job creation, and national security. Research and development must remain as a central pillar of our national economic and innovation strategies and, like this bill, it is in Australia's national interest. I commend the bill to the chamber.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I, too, rise to speak on the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026. At the outset, I'll put the coalition's philosophical position on all bills, particularly this one: we need less bureaucracy where there is little genuine risk but stronger scrutiny where the risk is real. This bill should be understood through a simple principle—that is, Australia needs one coherent foreign policy, and that is especially relevant when states, territories, councils, public universities any organisations want to engage internationally. Those engagements are overwhelmingly positive—absolutely, overwhelmingly positive. Everyone in Australia should be encouraged to see what's out in the world. I was the beneficiary of a Churchill Fellowship to investigate the links between secondary education and industry in Germany, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. I was just one of many people or organisations who engages with and creates relationships with foreign entities and foreign countries to be able to bring knowledge from around the world back here.</para>
<para>But problems can arise when foreign actors deliberately or otherwise influence or attempt to influence Australian institutions in ways that cut across or are inconsistent with what a Commonwealth parliament has decided is in our national interest. Therefore, the Commonwealth needs visibility of significant foreign arrangements and the ability to act where Australia's interests could be threatened. That is why the former coalition established the Foreign Arrangements Scheme in 2020. One of the main issues that forced that Foreign Arrangements Scheme was the then Victorian premier Dan Andrews's decision to sign up to China's Belt and Road Initiative.</para>
<para>Just for the history on this, Victoria entered into a memorandum of understanding in 2018 and a framework agreement in 2019 with China's National Development and Reform Commission. Those arrangements were not ordinary commercial contracts that you might see; they carried strategic and symbolic significance, because, as we know, the Belt and Road Initiative is one of Beijing's signature foreign policy and infrastructure initiatives. The Commonwealth had deliberately made the decision not to sign Australia up to the Belt and Road Initiative at a national level. So we had this situation where one state government was effectively sending a different signal internationally, in relation to Australia's foreign relations and foreign interests, from that of the elected Commonwealth government. I think we could all agree that that was an untenable position.</para>
<para>I want to be very clear about this. The issue is not whether Victoria or any state—or, indeed, our nation—should trade or engage with China or any international partners. In fact, I come from an electorate where our trade with China has built and expanded many industries, particularly the dairy industry. You only need to go through supermarkets in parts of major Chinese cities to see the amazing products from the Goulburn Valley—and from other parts of Australia—and particularly the dairy products. People are prepared to pay such a premium for those because of the food safety, because of the high quality—because of the trust that people not just in China but around the world have in Australian farmers. So that wasn't an issue, and the Victorian government does well and other state governments do well to engage with foreign countries in relation to enhancing export opportunities. The issue was whether a state government should be able to enter into arrangements with a foreign national government that cut across what has been decided are our national foreign policy settings.</para>
<para>What happened was that the former coalition government used the Foreign Arrangements Scheme in April 2021 to cancel Victoria's Belt and Road arrangements after determining they were inconsistent with Australia's foreign policy or adverse to Australia's foreign relations. That episode showed that foreign policy cannot and should not be outsourced, fragmented or run state by state. In relation to Victoria, the agreement, when you read what it was about, promised to 'increase the participation of Chinese infrastructure companies in Victoria's infrastructure construction program'.</para>
<para>We can debate what the BRI is, and we can debate its impact around the world, but the key element is: Who should decide whether Australia gets involved in it? Should it be a state government or should it be the Commonwealth government? It absolutely should be the Commonwealth government. As to the Victorian government, a state government doesn't even have a foreign affairs minister. So this was Premier Andrews making what I think was a major strategic misjudgement and a fairly heavy-handed decision—which Premier Andrews did quite often in Victoria—I must say, to the great detriment of what we now experience in Victoria. I hope the people of Victoria will remember some, or maybe many, of the decisions that Premier Andrews made during his time as premier. Hopefully, they will factor that into the decision they make in late November when deciding whether to have a fresh start, if I could put it that way.</para>
<para>The bill doesn't just apply to states; it applies to other entities, including universities. Universities are great institutions in Australia. Their interactions with foreign entities, universities and in some cases governments can be a positive thing. But there's got to be some sort of—and this is what this bill does—reporting of arrangements that universities want to develop with foreign entities and governments so that it can be assessed and we can make sure that Australia's foreign interests are being looked after in relation to these arrangements.</para>
<para>The explanatory memorandum frames the bill as both strengthening and streamlining the Foreign Arrangements Scheme. It strengthens that scheme by shifting the decision-making framework from the narrower concept of foreign relations to a broader national interest test. This matters because the national interest test includes security. It includes economic, strategic and foreign policy considerations, not just that formal diplomatic consistency. We feel like there is a gap in the legislation, which is significant researcher-to-researcher collaboration. The coalition amendment would close that gap and make sure that any researcher-to-researcher arrangements that could impact Australia's national interests is targeted and proportionate.</para>
<para>Australia has had a very proud history of foreign policy since federation. Australia has generally participated very well on the foreign stage. There's always been this focus on Australia's national interest, but it has to be a national responsibility. Therefore, it has to originate in this place. It has to originate in this place, which is the Australian parliament and the Australian Commonwealth executive government. It can't be run by a patchwork of state-by-state arrangements. We have premiers of various proclivities when it comes to that. Australia should engage confidently with the world, but not in a naive way. The test should be simple: does the arrangement serve Australia's national interest?</para>
<para>The Victorian Belt and Road deal and saga with Premier Andrews and the Victorian government showed why the Commonwealth needed visibility and power to act. The coalition created the Foreign Arrangements Scheme because that sovereignty needs to be protected. Strengthening and streamlining the scheme is sensible, but the streamlining can't become weakening. There should be less bureaucracy for low-risk arrangements but stronger scrutiny when the risk is real.</para>
<para>To finalise my remarks and make it very clear—and I would hope most people in this place would understand and agree with this—constitutionally, the federal government has responsibility for foreign relations and significant arrangements with foreign nations. That needs to be the case. It needs to be embedded in law. This bill goes a long way towards doing that, and I commend it. I encourage the government to support the coalition's amendment, which will strengthen it even more.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026. This bill updates a piece of legislation that has, in six years of quiet operation, become one of the more consequential tools Australia has for regulating Australia's engagement with the world. The Foreign Arrangements Scheme does not make headlines the way a trade deal or a defence pact does. It covers a broad range of relations and how Australia interacts globally. It sits underneath almost everything this country does internationally below the level of this parliament. That includes every friendship agreement a state government signs, every research partnership a public university enters and every sister city arrangement a local council strikes—and where I'm from, in Darwin, there are certainly many of those.</para>
<para>This bill reforms Australia's Foreign Arrangements Scheme, which oversees international agreements entered into by state, territory and local governments and public universities. The bill follows the 2024 independent review by Rosemary Huxtable, which found that the scheme was broadly working but needed to be more risk focused and less burdensome. Since 2020, more than 22,000 arrangements have been notified under the scheme.</para>
<para>There are a number of key changes in this bill. The most important relates to national interest. The bill will explicitly make Australia's national interest, including security, economic and foreign policy interests, a central objective of the scheme. The bill also brings stronger risk management, which allows conditions to be placed on foreign arrangements rather than simply approving or rejecting them, including conditions imposed after an arrangement begins. Then there will be whole-of-government information sharing, allowing information gathered under the scheme to be shared with relevant Commonwealth agencies; broader coverage, capturing arrangements involving overseas campuses of Australian universities; change in relation to noncompliance, giving the minister more proportionate options for dealing with inadvertent breaches; less red tape, with removal of unnecessary approval requirements for low-risk matters, including minor variations and renewals of previously assessed arrangements; greater clarity, with clarification of concepts such as institutional autonomy to make compliance easier; better transparency, with modernisation of the public register so that it remains accurate and focuses on significant decisions; and more administrative flexibility, allowing targeted delegation and limited extensions to decision-making timeframes for complex cases.</para>
<para>The bottom line is that our government is arguing that the bill strikes a balance between protecting Australia from foreign interference and strategic risks and making it easier to undertake legitimate international engagement in the national interest. In essence, it is a risk based tightening of the scheme, combined with deregulation for low-risk arrangements. This is what sensible parties of government do. We manage risk to make sure we can claim value in as much of the upside as possible while minimising the downside risk.</para>
<para>The case for the original act, back in 2020, was fairly straightforward: foreign policy is and must remain a Commonwealth responsibility. But state and territory governments, local councils and our public universities have, over decades, built up thousands of their own direct relationships with foreign governments and foreign institutions—naturally and sensibly, in the overwhelming majority of cases—in pursuit of trade, research and cultural ties that benefit their communities. The problem was never the existence of these relationships; the issue was that no-one in Canberra could see all of them at once, and, without that visibility, this country had no way of knowing when one of them might cut across our national interest.</para>
<para>In the years since, the Commonwealth has used this act to step in where a state-level arrangement no longer stacked up against Australia's foreign policy. These interventions are worth pausing on because they show the framework doing exactly what it was built to do—not blocking the thousands of ordinary partnerships that make up the bulk of the register but catching the small number that genuinely warrant Commonwealth attention on risk informed grounds.</para>
<para>Darwin and Palmerston in the Northern Territory—the place that I'm so proud to represent—sit closer to Dili, the capital of Timor-Leste, and Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, than they do to this very building, the seat of our national democracy. Our government, our university and our local councils carry a number of longstanding friendship agreements and education partnerships with overseas provinces and institutions, some dating back to the 1990s and all of them sitting on the national foreign arrangements register, alongside more than 9,000 other arrangements notified by governments and universities right across the country. These are, almost without exception, at the run-of-the-mill, low-risk end of the scheme—for example, education exchanges, twinning arrangements, research collaborations.</para>
<para>We need to be able to differentiate agreements with foreign entities and actors based on risk. The kinds of arrangements described above should be treated proportionally rather than put through the same degree of rigour and due process that higher risk arrangements should rightly be subjected to. Territorians don't need reminding of what happens when a decision with international implications gets made without anyone in Canberra seeing it first. In 2015, the then CLP government leased the Port of Darwin to a Chinese-owned company for 99 years. This was a decision made entirely at the Territory level by the CLP government, with no requirement to notify the Commonwealth beforehand and no opportunity for it to consider the proposal. To be clear, that lease sits outside the scope of this act, then and now, as critical infrastructure transactions are governed by a separate regime entirely. But the alarm that it caused right across the political spectrum is illustrative and is a large part of why an appetite for a framework like this one existed in the first place.</para>
<para>Territorians know better than most what it feels like to read about a consequential decision in the newspaper instead of being consulted on it. The bill before the house gives effect to the findings of the 2025 independent review of the scheme, led by Ms Rosemary Huxtable AO PSM. It drew on public submissions from the state and territory governments, who administer these arrangements day to day, from local councils and from the university sector, which has carried much of the scheme's compliance burden since 2020. Twenty-three recommendations came out of that process. The government has accepted every one of them, and this bill is delivering on that.</para>
<para>At the heart of the bill is a change to the test itself. Currently, the minister assesses a proposed arrangement against whether it adversely affects Australia's foreign relations or is inconsistent with our foreign policy. This bill broadens that test to the national interest, allowing security and economic considerations to be weighed alongside foreign policy, not as an afterthought to it. The bill also gives the minister a genuinely new tool, the power to approve an arrangement subject to conditions, rather than facing the binary choice of approving it outright or refusing it altogether. For an arrangement that is broadly sound but carries one specific area of concern, that is a far more proportionate response than an outright knockback, and it is a change that state and territory entities themselves have asked for through the review process.</para>
<para>Where the bill streamlines, it does so with real practical effect for jurisdictions like the Northern Territory. Low-risk arrangements and entities can now be deemed non-core by rule, cutting them out of the full approval pathway. Non-core arrangements move to a single-step notification process rather than requiring notice before entry and again after. Critically, where the minister has already approved a core arrangement once, a minor variation no longer triggers a full re-approval process from scratch.</para>
<para>The bill makes a series of further improvements that, taken together, modernise how the scheme actually functions. It establishes a proper framework for sharing the information collected through notifications across government, so that agencies with a legitimate interest in an arrangement are not working in the dark, while keeping that information subject to the same obligations of confidence that apply today. It requires state and territory entities to notify the minister when an arrangement is terminated early and when a longstanding arrangement exists with an entity newly prescribed under the rules, with reasonable transition windows of three to six months built in rather than having an unrealistic overnight compliance deadline which closes in gaps that left the register incomplete. It brings the overseas campuses of Australian universities within scope for the first time, addressing a real gap where a campus with separate legal status offshore fell outside the definition of a state or territory entity altogether. And it is very important that we are closing those gaps.</para>
<para>The bill also makes a consequential amendment to the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act, or ASIO Act, clarifying that decisions made under this act are not 'prescribed administrative action' for the purposes of ASIO's security assessment framework. This ensures that security advice feeding into a ministerial decision under this scheme is treated consistently with that decision itself, rather than subject to a separate and potentially conflicting review pathway.</para>
<para>Every one of these changes was tested against the same question that the Huxtable review was asked to answer—that is, does the scheme's current settings match where the real risk actually sits? Six years of operation shows us the risk is concentrated in a small number of arrangements that warrant close and ongoing scrutiny. The volume sits overwhelmingly in low-risk, long-running relationships that were being processed as if they carried the same risk profile as everything else. This bill fixes this mismatch and gets the balance right. It enables seizing the benefits of upside while minimising the downside risks.</para>
<para>For a place like the Northern Territory, getting that balance right matters more than most. We are, geographically and economically, one of the most internationally engaged parts of this country. Our proximity to our regional partners and friends shapes almost everything we do. Our university, our government—the NT government—and our councils will keep building those international partnerships because they bring international students, researchers and trading relationships to the Top End that our territory genuinely needs. They should be able to do that without unnecessary friction on the arrangements that, plainly, warrant none. This bill gets out of the way of good arrangements with a reasonable and low-risk profile, while increasing risk mitigation on those for which that is not the case.</para>
<para>This bill is not a retreat from international engagement or the Commonwealth's stymieing it, and it is not built on the premise that every foreign partnership or deal is problematic. Our Labor federal government has been revitalising our relationships in the region, and progressing and driving the development and enhancement of our relationships all over the world, and that work is continuing. The government has been explicit through this whole process that the value of these partnerships is real—economically, culturally and strategically—and that the scheme exists to protect that value, not to discourage it.</para>
<para>A framework that made every low risk-arrangement as burdensome as a genuinely sensitive one would not make this country safer. It would teach state and territory entities to see Commonwealth oversight as an obstacle rather than as a safeguard, which it is. That is precisely the wrong lesson for a scheme that depends on good-faith cooperation from the jurisdiction it covers. This bill gets that balance right.</para>
<para>The last thing that we need in jurisdictions like mine, in Darwin and Palmerston in the Northern Territory, is for the balance not to be got right. What our experience in the Northern Territory also shows is that inappropriate decisions made at a sub-federal government and sub-federal parliamentary level can be problematic, so we need to make sure that those risks are managed appropriately. This bill gets that balance right, and I commend it to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On 1 January 1901, a Tuesday, the Commonwealth of Australia came into official existence. What happened on that day was six British colonies united to form a single independent nation. That was, in the history of this country, a red-letter day, a very important day. The Parliamentary Education Office tells us this, under the heading 'The Federation of Australia':</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australia's Federation came about through a process of deliberation, consultation and debate.</para></quote>
<para>They are important things. It goes on:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The colonies were almost like 6 separate countries. For example, each had its own government and laws, its own defence force, issued its own stamps and collected tariffs—taxes—on goods that crossed its borders. The colonies had even built railways using different gauges, which complicated the transport of people and goods across the continent.</para></quote>
<para>Goodness knows, we're still suffering the effects of some of those things. Statehood is still alive and well even though we are very much 125-plus years on.</para>
<para>But this bill, Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026, is a good piece of legislation in as much as our states need to know that, when it comes to foreign affairs, foreign relations, international treaties and the like, it is the Commonwealth, Canberra, the federal government that should and must have the most say so. Australia needs not many but a single coherent foreign policy, including when the territories and states, councils and public universities are engaging internationally, not just for Australia's sake but for their sake.</para>
<para>Most engagements that are conducted are overwhelmingly positive, but there can be problems when and where foreign actors perhaps maliciously, deliberately or otherwise influence Australian institutions in ways that go against our national interest. And we can't have that. I heard the member for Solomon say sensible governments decide on this policy, and he's quite right. It was the former coalition government which established the Foreign Arrangements Scheme in 2020. The Commonwealth does need visibility of significant foreign arrangements and the means to act where Australia's interests are threatened.</para>
<para>We live in a very volatile world. We live in a world in which foreign actors, malicious or otherwise, can very much interfere in the good governance of our country, Australia. We all well remember the Victorian Labor government signing up to China's Belt and Road Initiative. At the time the Commonwealth had limited ability to ensure that that agreement aligned with Australia's foreign policy. Do you think that mattered to the then premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews? Do you think he cared? Not a jot; no way. But the Commonwealth coalition fixed that gap. The scheme was established, and Victoria's BRI agreement was subsequently cancelled in April 2021.</para>
<para>That hasn't stopped Mr Andrews going overseas and cosying up with his buddies in Beijing. It hasn't stopped a statue being proposed, made of bronze, in his honour on or near Spring Street. But since then, since the Commonwealth stepped in, as it rightly should have, more than 18,000 arrangements have been notified and more than 14,000 have been found to fall within the scheme. The scheme has given the Commonwealth proper and justifiable oversight over foreign arrangements that simply didn't exist before. It didn't happen before the coalition put in place the Foreign Arrangements Scheme in 2020. Five years of operation have shown that the scheme could be better targeted, and this is why the government is now doing what it is doing with this bill.</para>
<para>Too much effort has been spent processing arrangements that posed little or no genuine risk to our foreign interest. Around 92 per cent of core arrangements and about three-quarters of what would be non-core arrangements did not require complicated, complex and intricate oversight or assessment. Many were routine, including student credit transfers, fair enough; sister city arrangements, okay; ordinary educational engagement, fair enough.</para>
<para>But, over those not covered by what I just mentioned, the Commonwealth must have jurisdiction. You can't have a premier, such as Mr Andrews, running off on a folly, pretending to be Australia's spokesperson and representative and making arrangements to suit himself or his own state. That is why Victoria's dealings with the BRI were brought into question. That is why, ultimately, the deal was cancelled.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It being 1.30, the debate is interrupted. The member for Riverina will have leave to continue when the debate is resumed.</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 13:30 to 15:59</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR</name>
    <name.id>315618</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026. At its core, this bill is about something that is both incredibly important and increasingly complex: how Australia engages with the rest of the world. Australia's international relationships are not conducted only in Canberra. They are built in our universities and research institutions. They are built through trade and investment. They are built through cultural exchanges, sporting relationships and education. They are built by local governments, state governments and public universities, working with partners overseas. They are built every day by Australians themselves—and that is particularly true in a place like Barton.</para>
<para>When I think about my electorate, I don't see international relations as something that exists somewhere far away from the people I represent. I see it in Hurstville; I see it in Kingsgrove, Roselands, Bexley and Rockdale. I see it in the businesses that trade with people from overseas. I see it in the students whose families have come from every corner of the world. I see it in the community organisations celebrating Lunar New Year, Diwali, Eid, Christmas, and cultural festivals from across the globe. I see it also in the countless families in Barton whose connections extend across borders.</para>
<para>Our multiculturalism is one of Australia's greatest strengths. It's a strength economically, it's a strength socially and it's a strength diplomatically. The relationships Australians maintain with their countries of heritage can help build understanding and connection between Australia and the wider world.</para>
<para>For me, this is not an academic suggestion. I grew up in a multicultural community in southern Sydney. I grew up around my Sri Lankan family and Maltese and Italian families and many others. I know what it means to have family connections that stretch across countries and cultures. I know that those connections do not weaken our Australian identity; they strengthen it.</para>
<para>That is why, when we talk about foreign engagement, we should be careful not to confuse openness with naivety. Australia should be open to the world, but we should also be clear-eyed about our national interest. We should also welcome international partnerships that create jobs, support research, strengthen our communities and expand opportunity. At the same time, we need appropriate safeguards for when an arrangement could create risks for Australia's foreign relations or security or our broader national interest.</para>
<para>That balance is what this bill is about. We are living through a period of significant global challenge and contest, and the international environment is more complex than it was when the Foreign Arrangements Scheme was introduced in 2020. Strategic competition has intensified. Technology has changed the way countries and institutions interact. Economic relationships can have strategic consequences. Universities and research institutions operate across borders. Governments at every level increasingly engage internationally.</para>
<para>In that environment, we need a framework that is capable of recognising both the opportunities and the risks. The Foreign Arrangements Scheme was introduced in 2020 to provide visibility and oversight of arrangements entered into by state and territory governments, local governments and public universities with foreign entities. The purpose was straightforward. Australia can have many governments and many institutions engaging internationally, but we must have one coherent national foreign policy. That's an important principle, and it's a principle that has become particularly relevant over the recent years.</para>
<para>When an Australian state or territory government enters into an arrangement with a foreign government, it can have implications that extend well beyond that state or territory. That is why there needs to be a national framework. It is not about preventing states, territories or local governments from engaging internationally; it's about making sure that engagement happens consistent with Australia's national interest. Indeed, this is where I think the reforms before us get that balance right.</para>
<para>The government commissioned an independent review of the Foreign Arrangements Scheme in 2024, led by Rosemary Huxtable AO, PSM, and the review consulted widely across federal, state, territory and local governments, as well as Australian universities. The conclusion was not that the scheme was fundamentally broken—quite the opposite. The review found that the scheme was working but that it could be improved. It needed to better target genuine risks. It needed clearer definitions. It needed to reduce unnecessary complexity. And it needed to make compliance more proportionate. The government accepted all 23 recommendations of the review, either in full or in principle.</para>
<para>This bill implements those recommendations that require legislative change, and that is good policy making. We should not legislate simply for the sake of legislating; we should listen, we should understand reviews and we should identify what is working and what is not, and then we should improve the system. This is precisely what this bill does.</para>
<para>The bill places national interest more clearly at the centre of decision-making, because Australia's national interest is broader than simply asking whether something technically affects our foreign relations. Our national interest encompasses our security, our economic prosperity, our sovereign capability, our international standing, our research and education systems and the strength and resilience of our communities.</para>
<para>The bill also strengthens risk management by allowing conditions to be imposed on arrangements. That is an important improvement, because regulation should not always be binary; it should not be a case of saying either 'yes' or 'no'. Sometimes the appropriate response is to say 'yes, but with safeguards'. That is a much more sophisticated approach to regulation, and it reflects the reality of international engagement.</para>
<para>We also need to recognise that not every international arrangement carries the same level of risk. A local government cultural exchange with an overseas municipality should not necessarily be treated in the same way as a strategic arrangement involving critical infrastructure, sensitive research or a foreign government department. Good regulation should distinguish between those things, and that is why I welcome the bill's risk based approach. It reduces unnecessary approval and notification requirements for lower risk arrangements while strengthening oversight where the risks are greater.</para>
<para>That is not deregulation for its own sake. It is better regulation. It means that government can focus its attention and resources where they're actually needed. This is particularly important for our public universities. Australian universities are some of our greatest international assets. They attract students from across the world. They collaborate with researchers internationally, they contribute to scientific discovery, they build networks between countries and they support Australian jobs and economic activity. We should never lose sight of that.</para>
<para>International education and research collaboration are not merely economic transactions. They build relationships with people. A student who comes to Australia to study does not simply receive a qualification. They build friendships, they develop professional networks, they experience Australian society and they take those experiences back into the world. That is soft power, that is diplomacy and that is part of Australia's national interest. The bill recognises this while also ensuring that contemporary forms of international engagement are appropriately captured, and that includes arrangements involving overseas campuses of Australian universities. The world has changed considerably since 2020, and our legislation needs to keep pace.</para>
<para>But there is another important part of this bill that I just want to acknowledge, and that is that it improves information sharing and whole-of-government coordination. We should not have different parts of government operating in silos when assessing arrangements that may have implications on our national interest. Foreign policy, trade, education, research and national security are increasingly interconnected. A decision made in one part of government can have consequences elsewhere. Better information sharing means better decisions, and better decisions mean stronger protections for Australian interests.</para>
<para>The bill also improves compliance arrangements. Importantly, it introduces more proportionate mechanisms for dealing with inadvertent breaches. That is common sense. A regulatory framework should distinguish between deliberate attempts to circumvent the law and an honest mistake made in circumstances where the requirements were unclear. Compliance should be taken seriously, but fairness and proportionality should be taken seriously too.</para>
<para>The bill also seeks to make the public register more accurate, transparent and useful. That matters because transparency builds trust. Australians should be able to understand what arrangements are being entered into and how those arrangements are being managed. But transparency also needs to be meaningful. A register that is technically comprehensive but difficult to understand is not particularly useful. The reforms before us seek to make the system clearer and more usable, and that is a welcome improvement.</para>
<para>As someone who has previously served in local government, particularly at Georges River Council, I also appreciate the practical importance of getting this right. Local governments are increasingly connected to the world. Councils engage in sister city relationships. They participate in international cultural and economic exchanges. They host delegations. They support multicultural communities. They build relationships that can create opportunities for local businesses, students and community organisations, and these activities can be incredibly valuable.</para>
<para>But local councils should not be expected to navigate an unnecessarily complex Commonwealth regulatory framework for every low-risk international interaction. The answer is not to shut the door; the answer is to have clear rules about when the Commonwealth needs to be involved. That is the balance this bill seeks to achieve and that balance is particularly relevant for my electorate of Barton.</para>
<para>My electorate is one of the most culturally diverse communities in Australia. People in Barton have family, cultural and educational and commercial connections across the globe. Local businesses in Barton are part of international supply chains. Students participate in an education system that attracts people from around the world, and community organisations in Barton maintain connections with diaspora communities and institutions overseas.</para>
<para>When international relationships work well, the benefits are felt locally. They can mean jobs. They can mean investment. They can mean new research. They can mean educational opportunities. They can mean stronger cultural understanding. But when international engagement is poorly managed, the consequences can also be felt locally. That's why we need a framework that is open to opportunity while protecting Australia's interests. I think that principle can be summed up quite simply: we should not build walls around Australia; we should build strong foundations for Australia's engagement with the world. That means being confident in who we are. It means understanding that multiculturalism is Australia's strength. It means welcoming international students and researchers. It means supporting Australian businesses to engage with the global market. It means maintaining strong relationships with our partners, and it also means having the national safeguards necessary to protect Australia's sovereignty, security and foreign policy.</para>
<para>As Foreign Minister Wong has said, Australia's international partnerships are a source of real strength, and I really agree with that. But partnerships are strongest when they are built on clarity, trust and an understanding of each other's interests. This bill gives us a clearer framework for achieving that. It modernises the Foreign Arrangements Scheme and places the national interest at the centre. It strengthens risk management and improves coordination. It captures contemporary forms of international engagement and, more importantly, it reduces unnecessary administrative burden for lower risk arrangements, and that is sensible reform. It recognises that Australia's international engagement is not something to be feared; it is something to be managed wisely.</para>
<para>As the member for Barton, I represent, as I said, a very diverse community, a community that knows better than most of Australia we are part of a much bigger world. Our diversity is evidence of that. Our families are evidence of that. Our businesses are evidence of that. Our universities are evidence of that, and our future is definitely that too. We should remain open to the world, but being open does not mean being careless, being confident does not mean being complacent, and protecting our national interests does not mean turning our back on international cooperation. The challenge for governments is to hold those things together, and that is what responsible government does.</para>
<para>This bill strikes that balance and it keeps Australia open to international engagement while ensuring that the engagement is consistent with our national interest. It strengthens the safeguards where the risks are real while removing unnecessary barriers where the risks are low. It ensures that, as the international environment becomes more complex, Australia's framework for foreign arrangements remains fit for purpose. For those reasons, I support this bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MATT SMITH</name>
    <name.id>312393</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026. Australia and Australians more broadly are pretty bloody good. The flag that's flying proudly above this place right now means something right around the world. Across the luggage of backpackers, people see that flag and they smile because they know that attached to that flag is an Australian. Walk into any pub all across the world and lead with, 'G'day.' You're going to strike up a conversation. You're going to find some new mates. People are interested in us. They want to be around us. They want to invest in us. And why wouldn't they?</para>
<para>Our sport's amazing. We export our best leagues to New Zealand. They're not very good at it, but it's fine. They get to play along sometimes. We are becoming more and more the hub of the South Pacific and the hub of South-East Asia. The opportunities that are being presented to us by improvements in travel, improvements in technology and the way the world is becoming more and more interconnected are really putting Australia in the box seat going into this century. Our critical minerals in abundance, right throughout the far north and across the west, are going to make us a world leader. This is something to be excited about. This is something to really get behind, which we can do as a nation.</para>
<para>But we need guardrails because so many people are interested in us. It's coming across at all different levels of government now, as well as public universities and public institutions. Everybody wants a piece of Australia. Everybody wants to be on our team. It's a good problem to have, but the guardrails are important. Sometimes you lose sight of things. Stuff can slip away. Occasionally—hopefully not often—there are bad actors trying to infiltrate us.</para>
<para>This bill seeks to improve the existing legislation to ensure that things move smoothly, with better coordination and better cooperation right across so that we can all take advantage of the opportunities that are presented to us. That includes public universities. Cairns and the far north are home to two world-class institutions: CQUniversity and JCU. Both have overseas campuses. That's great, because we are training, from the South Pacific to Asia, the future engineers, the doctors and the nurses. The leaders of those countries will have been educated by an Australian institution, and that's exciting. We already train a large part of their defence forces, particularly from the South Pacific, and policing. Everybody comes here. We send our knowledge back out into the world, and that's something to be proud of. It's something about which, as a nation, we can hold our head up high. People talk about middle powers. We are a strong middle power, and we are a leader in our region. We lead through kindness, through generosity, through training, through identifying where our relationships can get stronger and stepping into that breach, and through being the shoulders or the ears and then being able to promote the voice of the South Pacific—in particular, very small islands. They need somebody there. We are that person. We are the superpower of the South Pacific. It's not a bad place to be.</para>
<para>So, when we're out there promoting ourselves, providing this opportunity and showing the world what Australia is, we can do it with confidence that everyone is singing from the same song sheet and that, right across the country, everybody knows this is what Australia is and Australia stands for. These things are in our national interest. Things like the sister cities are fantastic. They show the world what we're capable of. They show our compassion, our friendship and our ability to take people in from all cultures right around the world and give them that time and that mateship. Mateship is more than a word to Australia. When people have an interaction with Australians, they understand that mateship is almost a state of mind. It's a place where you go where the friendship is deeper. It means: 'I'm with you no matter what. I'll support you through thick and thin.' That's what it means to be Australian, and that's what is so attractive to the rest of the world.</para>
<para>When this was commissioned in 2024, led by Rosemary Huxtable, the complexity and the unclearness of it were really what held it back, and that's why we're in this position today. It's why we are speaking on this bill. To simplify things, particularly when you're dealing across governments and across organisations, is tricky. We as the federal government have entire departments to speak to—Foreign Affairs and Trade, DFAT. Amazing. We can get advice from anybody at all times.</para>
<para>The mayor of Cook Shire doesn't have that opportunity, but they want to reach out. They want to expand their horizons. They want to bring people into Cook Shire to work on the farms, to work in the pubs, to work in aged care and to develop that understanding of what it means to live in outback and rural Australia, to understand the regions, so that someone from Beijing might have an idea of what it means to live in the proper bush, in the cape, where the roads are dirt and the rivers get up real fast.</para>
<para>I've been to Beijing. I was there playing. You can't see the stars. If you come from a place like that to the outback, to the cape—or really anywhere in Australia—and you look up and you see the Milky Way for the first time, what an opportunity! What a gift! I was out Yass way on the weekend—no light pollution. You can reach up and touch the stars. I've grown up with the stars, and it was beautiful. If you've never seen them before, if you've never experienced that majesty, you can do it here and you can do it by us improving our relations with countries and letting them understand.</para>
<para>A lot of people are looking to us for leadership. They want to bring their money here. They want to bring their economic values here. They want to bring the world to Australia, and Australia needs to go out to the world. We are an island, but we can't be an island anymore. Economically, that doesn't make sense. Culturally, that doesn't make sense. Socially, that doesn't make sense. But to make it a free-for-all in a world that's changing so rapidly, with tech giants, with bad-faith actors, with a couple of wars going on—without guidelines, without guardrails, it leaves us open to problems, open to things that we didn't anticipate, and we can't compromise our sovereignty in such a fashion.</para>
<para>The sovereignty of Australia is paramount to our position in the rest of the world. The uniqueness of the Australian way of life, the uniqueness of the Australian attitude, has to be protected. Our intellectual property and our infrastructure have to be Australian. This sets down those clear guidelines so that, right across the country, everyone understands where the no-go zones are. And it sends a message not just locally but internationally as well. With those guardrails legislated and put down in law, other countries know where that no-go zone is as well, and they will steer clear of it.'</para>
<para>People watch this. People see us. Our words in here matter, our actions in here matter, not just locally but on a global scale. Be we backbenchers, ministers or prime ministers, everything we say is out there, able to be picked up and disseminated across the world in record time. Everyone watches, whether they be good or indifferent or seek to do us harm. By putting forth these rules, those who maybe do seek to do us harm know we're not to be messed with. 'These are the rules. These are the rules that we play by. These are the rules that we expect you to play by. And, if we do so, then we can have a truly mutually beneficial arrangement. You will give us your best and brightest, and we will return to you doctors, engineers, leaders, nurses, governance. You give us your best and brightest, and we will develop technologies, we will cure diseases, we will make a difference.'</para>
<para>The work being done in the Far North around tuberculosis and with <inline font-style="italic">Wolbachia</inline> bacteria—which deal with dengue fever—is world leading. It saves lives. That's something that we should be proud of. That's something that we should give to the world. That's something that we need the world to help us with so that we can ensure that our world-leading intellectuals, our world-leading scientists, have access to all sorts of different things.</para>
<para>I spoke today with Southern Cross University, and they're working on a program right now for cloud brightening. Cloud brightening is essentially sucking up seawater and putting in nanocrystals of salt—74 trillion, I'm led to believe. I don't know who counted them. They spray them up into the clouds. The light then reflects off the salt crystals back into space. What that does is provide a cooling mechanism for the Great Barrier Reef in times of stress. This is being partially funded by Southern Cross University, but it's also partly funded by ARIA, which is from the British government. They see Australian ingenuity, and they want to be a part of it. They don't only see what it does for the Great Barrier Reef; it can protect the Arctic, the Antarctic and the glaciers. We can get the world looking at what we've got. They want to invest.</para>
<para>This is just one of the thousands and thousands of success stories celebrating what we're capable of. Wi-fi—that's Australian. I'm celebrating Australian stuff right now. You know what? I love it. We do some really good things. Something as simple as making the clouds brighter thought up by an Australian—his name's Dan. He's great. He lives down at Coffs Harbour. He likes to go diving, and he likes to go surfing. He found a problem. There were a whole bunch of other different ideas. He's worked through them all. He's decided this is the one, and the world is investing in it.</para>
<para>We talk about the cultural cringe that used to be a part of the Australian culture. That's gone now. We're world leading in all sorts of things. I'm so proud of that. We should all be so proud of that. I think we should all occasionally take stock of where Australia sits in the world and why Australia sits in the world. It's because of people like Dan, and it's because of people like that who came before him. It's because of the outreach done by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Foreign Affairs to make sure that Australia's reputation is solid in the region and solid right around the world. It's giving us a chance to be the best version of ourselves. If we become insular and take our eyes off the world around us, we don't necessarily get the benefit. I know that the world's looking to us, and I know that we're looking back out at the world. This is just going to make it so much easier for everybody to do so.</para>
<para>You don't want people out there unable or unsure because, if they go too far and they make a mistake, the book gets thrown at them. That's a very real fear for a lot of people. This simplifies that. Everyone will have a clear, precise understanding of exactly where the guardrails are. Get up to them, but don't cross them. That's a really important part, giving that flexibility and that compassion, because people do make mistakes. Legislation is complicated, and—if you are coming from a smaller council, a university or any public institution and you don't have that experience in foreign affairs or foreign diplomacy—it's easy to make an error.</para>
<para>People shouldn't be punished for that, because all they're trying to do is take what makes Australia great and show it to the rest of the world. I'm excited by what this bill means, and what it means is Australia being shown off. I think everybody in this House is excited by the prospect of this country being shown off. I know how proud every single member in here is because they wouldn't be here if they weren't. They've put their hand up, and they've said: 'This is my country. This is our country. We're damn proud of it, and we're going to show it to the rest of the world. We are going to take what makes Australia special and give that to everybody else.' I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THISTLETHWAITE</name>
    <name.id>182468</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingsford Smith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank members for their contributions to this debate. Australia's prosperity and security in international standing are strengthened by international partnerships entered into by our states, territories, local governments and universities, and the government encourages and supports that engagement. Whether they're in research, education, trade, culture or other fields, these connections deliver substantial benefits to communities across Australia.</para>
<para>As the House has recognised, international engagement now takes place in a more complex strategic environment than was the case even a decade ago. That's why Australia requires a framework that supports beneficial engagements whilst ensuring that risk to our foreign policy and broader national interests can be identified and managed appropriately. The Foreign Arrangements Scheme has fulfilled that role since 2020. The independent review of the foreign relations act concluded that the scheme has provided an effective mechanism for visibility of foreign arrangements. It's enabled subnational governments and universities to continue pursuing international opportunities with confidence. At the same time, the review identified opportunities to improve the scheme's operation, reduce unnecessary burden and better focus regulatory efforts on areas of greater risk.</para>
<para>The reforms before the House are practical, measured and proportionate in the ways that they achieve their objectives. They strengthen the framework by ensuring decisions are guided by a broader conception of Australia's national interest, including national security, economic security, foreign policy and broader strategic considerations. The reforms provide more flexible tools for managing risk. They improve whole-of-government coordination through a carefully designed information-sharing framework and ensure that the scheme remains capable of responding to evolving forms of international engagement. At the same time, the bill reduces unnecessary regulation. These changes will make the scheme easier to navigate and administer whilst maintaining appropriate oversight. Importantly, the bill reflects the principle that regulatory effort should be directed where it is most needed. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>176</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move the amendment circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 1, page 33 (after line 22), after Part 16, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 16A — Significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Act 2020</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">67A Section 3 (after the paragraph beginning "Generally, this Act applies to variations")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This Act also applies to certain kinds of research arrangements (called significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements) in accordance with the rules (see Part 4A). A significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement is not a foreign arrangement within the meaning of the Act, but the parties to such an arrangement must include both a person who works for an Australian university (called a covered researcher for an Australian university) and also a foreign entity or an employee of a foreign entity.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">67B Section 4</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">covered researcher</inline> has the meaning given by section 59A.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">covered university</inline> has the meaning given by section 59.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement</inline> has the meaning given by section 59B.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">67C After Part 4</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 4A — Significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 1 — Preliminary</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">59 Covered universities</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For the purposes of this Act, a university is a <inline font-style="italic">covered university </inline>if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the university is established by, or under, a law of a State or Territory; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the university is a corporation to which paragraph 51(xx) of the Constitution applies.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: For how this Act (including this Part) applies in relation to the Australian National University, see section 55.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">59A Covered researchers</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For the purposes this Act, a person is a <inline font-style="italic">covered researcher</inline> for a covered university if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the person is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) an employee of the university; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) engaged, under a contractual arrangement with the university, to perform certain duties; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the duties of the person as an employee of the university, or under the contractual arrangement, include performing research.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">59B Significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) For the purposes of this Act, an arrangement is a <inline font-style="italic">significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement</inline> if all of the following conditions are satisfied:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the arrangement is not a foreign arrangement;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the parties to the arrangement include:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a person who is a covered researcher for a covered university; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) a foreign entity or an employee of a foreign entity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the arrangement relates to the conduct of research by a person mentioned in subparagraph (b)(i) or (ii);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the arrangement:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) would adversely affect, or would be likely to adversely affect, Australia's national interest; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) would be, or would be likely to be, inconsistent with Australia's foreign policy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) if the rules prescribe additional conditions that an arrangement must satisfy in order to be a significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement—the arrangement satisfies those conditions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The rules may specify circumstances in which an arrangement that satisfies the conditions in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c) is taken to satisfy, or not to satisfy, the condition in paragraph (1)(d).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 2 — Application of this Act to significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">59C This Act applies in relation to significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements in accordance with the rules</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The rules may specify how this Act applies in relation to a significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement, and if the rules do so, this Act applies in relation to a significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement in accordance with those rules.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Rules made for the purposes of subsection (1) may specify that this Act applies in relation to a significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement in accordance with any modifications of this Act specified in the rules.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) In making rules for the purposes of subsection (1), the Minister must have regard to the desirability of regulating a significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement in a way that is analogous to the way that a non-core foreign research arrangement is regulated by this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Rules made for the purposes of subsection (1) must not modify the definitions of <inline font-style="italic">covered university</inline>, <inline font-style="italic">covered researcher</inline> or <inline font-style="italic">significant researcher-to-researcher arrangement</inline> in this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: This subsection does not prevent rules from being made for the purposes of paragraph 59B(1)(e) or subsection 59B(2).</para></quote>
<para>In an era of heightened global tension, Australia's defence is more than just our military or our geography; it is also our capacity to work as a united nation. Indeed, our capacity to come together as team Australia when we are under any threat or any risk is fundamental to our ability to defend our nation.</para>
<para>This is a particularly acute reason for me to stand today to speak about this issue, because the risk that Australia is in today is well recognised on both sides of the chamber. We do have foreign powers who wish to extract information from not just government but also Australian institutions. It doesn't take much for somebody to remember the Victorian Labor government engaging in a Belt and Road Initiative deal with the People's Republic of China, without any Commonwealth oversight. That was a very clear example of something that was not a team Australia moment but a moment when one jurisdiction just went ahead without the usual checks and balances that a responsible Commonwealth government would typically apply.</para>
<para>That indicated a gap in our national security architecture, and it, among other examples of grey-zone activity, led to the establishment of the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Act 2020 and, within that, the Foreign Arrangements Scheme, a scheme that governs any such engagements through state governments, councils, territories and, indeed, public universities. As we've heard from other speakers, there has been a review, and the coalition is very happy to support the bill put forward by the government, which seeks to implement some of the findings from that review. That will strengthen that scheme. We want to see it work.</para>
<para>However, just as, years ago, a gap was found with respect to the BRI deal being signed, another gap has been found that the bill before the House unfortunately doesn't address. That is: we have arrangements in place that can be negotiated by university researchers in Australia with employees of foreign entities that don't go through this scheme. The purpose of this scheme is to notify the federal government so we can use the various agencies to do an assessment and identify whether there's a risk. If there's a risk, it could be cancelled. Today, we're debating improving this scheme, but there's this massive gap because you can have the exact same foreign actor dealing with the exact same topic of research and the exact same researcher at the exact same Australian university. That could be assessed, deemed inappropriate and cancelled if the university itself is party to that collaboration activity, but, where the university is not, there's no oversight. There's no statutory obligation.</para>
<para>That's a gaping hole that should be filled, and this is the opportunity to do it. I say to the Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade across the table—and I acknowledge his presence today and thank him for being here. I ask Labor to come along with the coalition on this. This is a serious problem we have. Because we are fixing up other aspects of the scheme, now's the time to fix this one too. We can't have a situation, as we have had, where there's an example of a breach like this and the remedy is a letter from the minister to a university. Letters are limp. We need a statutory obligation, and it is in a very constructive and good-faith manner that I put to the government: let's do this right. Let's also close that final gap.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THISTLETHWAITE</name>
    <name.id>182468</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingsford Smith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia has strong foreign interference and espionage laws that capture researchers, and our security agencies actively monitor and respond to threats to the national interest. If an Australian researcher passes sensitive information to a foreign power, that is espionage and it is already a crime under Australian law. Our government has been consistently clear that universities must play their role in managing risks, including through the University Foreign Interference Taskforce.</para>
<para>In the parliament, the shadow minister has recognised this, and he said: 'The Foreign Arrangements Scheme is not the only protection against foreign interference or inappropriate foreign involvement in Australian research, nor should it be. There are other safeguards.' We agree, and I note that the shadow minister is a member of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, which concluded that the government's amendments strike the right balance between maintaining Commonwealth visibility and oversight of foreign arrangements that may affect Australia's national interest whilst cutting unnecessary regulatory burden for lower risk activities.</para>
<para>There was a reason for the Huxtable review commissioned by the Albanese government and why they did not recommend the coalition's approach, and that's why the government will not be supporting this amendment.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to respond to the Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade's comments. Australia does indeed have an espionage law, but the problem is that it's not working with respect to the problem we're talking about today. It is completely unacceptable that the Australian people, the Australian government, and certainly the opposition find out through the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> reports that university researchers are engaging with foreign powers that have not been assessed by the Australian government. That is completely unacceptable, and to suggest for a moment that the existing regime is therefore doing its job effectively is patently wrong.</para>
<para>It was only a few months ago that we learnt that we had academics from the University of New South Wales, the University of Sydney and the University of Adelaide collaborating with an Iranian university on unmanned drones. We've got to remember there is often a dual use when it comes to technology. An academic need not believe he or she is partaking in some nefarious activity. They could be doing it very honestly, albeit naively. This is the risk we have.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, these things are not coming to light because of government assessment; they're coming to light because of the media. What sort of confidence does that give the Australian people that our national security is being well looked after when we're relying on newspaper articles? In the morning you wake up and you find out that there have been researchers in Australia dealing with foreign universities that have not been assessed under the right regime. Now, I'm not going to make specific allegations with respect to that particular case. I don't prejudge it. But what that case tells us, along with other cases that have come to light even in recent weeks—again through the media—is there's a gaping hole here, and it is not satisfactory for the response from the government to be: 'No, that's okay. We've got another law over here.' Clearly that law has not been working. The ones who have been working, to their credit, have been the media. I give them credit for that. But our security as a nation should not rely on media. It should rely on government—its agencies, its laws.</para>
<para>Here we have a law in place which governs a foreign arrangements scheme—a scheme that is meant to investigate research collaborations between Australian public universities and foreign entities that have been selected and identified by government. And yet we have such collaborations able to take place and not fall within the scheme for one reason: instead of the research agreement having a university logo at the top of the paper, it's just got the name of the professor or the academic. Every other risk can be the same—same university, same research, same topic, same academics, the whole lot. This is why it's a gap, and it's not good enough. At the very time when we are trying to amend the legislation that can close this gap, the government is effectively saying, 'It's alright. We've got other laws that look after that,' when barely a week goes by that we don't hear about another story.</para>
<para>For the sake of the country, I again ask the government to reconsider what appears to be a position—that I hear from the assistant minister—of pushing back on the amendment that I'm genuinely putting in good faith.</para>
<para>Question unresolved.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As it is necessary to resolve the question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>179</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7527" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>179</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MONCRIEFF</name>
    <name.id>316540</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Fourteen December 2025 is a day that will remain seared in the minds of Australians forever. The devastating terrorist attack at Bondi Beach demonstrated with brutal clarity the profound consequences that extremism inflicts on individuals, families and communities. It was a shock wave through the national psyche, as Australians held their loved ones close and embraced their communities during an absolutely gut-wrenching time.</para>
<para>Australia's national terrorism threat level is currently 'probable', meaning there is a greater than 50 per cent chance of an onshore terrorist attack or attack planning in the next 12 months. As our national intelligence agencies have warned, radicalisation networks are aggressively targeting teenagers online. We cannot ignore the fact that a young teenager influenced by violent extremist ideology is capable of inflicting catastrophic harm. The first and most fundamental responsibility of government is to ensure the safety and security of its citizens and residents. That is precisely what this bill does.</para>
<para>The Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 strengthens key counterterrorism powers and ensures that our frameworks remain available and effective in managing threats, including terrorists and those who pose a significant risk of committing a terrorist act. It extends the operation of the control order, preventive detention order and post-sentence order frameworks in divisions 105, 104 and 105A of the Criminal Code for a further three years to 7 December 2029. Without the passage of this bill, these critical counterterrorism powers are due to sunset at the end of this year. In our current national security environment, it is of vital importance that they be extended. The control order and preventive detention order framework were first introduced in 2005. The post-sentence order framework was later introduced in 2016 to establish continuing detention orders, and was expanded in 2021 to include extended supervision orders.</para>
<para>Letting these powers sunset would leave a dangerous void in our national security architecture. By extending them, we give agencies operational continuity while continuously refining how those powers are exercised as we navigate an increasingly complex set of circumstances. While some of these powers are rarely used, they are reserved for judicious and proportionate use in cases involving the most serious risk to our community. Continuing detention orders remain a last resort for individuals who present a real risk to public safety and provide a highly regulated means of monitoring high-risk individuals in the community. That is why this bill retains the existing sunset clauses to allow reconsideration of their necessity by the parliament before they sunset in December 2029.</para>
<para>The bill also extends the operation of key terrorism related police powers in the Crimes Act for a further three years to the end of 2029. These important powers enable police to respond—</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 16:47 to 17:08</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MONCRIEFF</name>
    <name.id>316540</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>These key terrorism-related police powers provide operational capabilities such as powers to stop, question and search persons in specified circumstances, as well as emergency entry powers where there is a serious and imminent threat to life or safety. These powers are designed for use in narrow circumstances, and the AFP has been appropriately judicious in its approach. The existing sunset clauses are retained to ensure reconsideration by parliament at the end of 2029.</para>
<para>Managing high-risk terrorist offenders starts with effective interventions before radicalisation takes hold. Our intelligence agencies have been clear that there is a growing cohort of young people influenced by online extremist content and youth recruitment networks who may come to pose a risk to the community. This bill extends the maximum duration of a control order for a young person from three months to 12 months. Importantly, these amendments only extend the maximum duration of an order, with courts retaining the discretion to impose orders of a shorter duration where appropriate.</para>
<para>Existing safeguards remain unchanged, such as the obligation for the best interests of the child to be taken into account in any decision to impose a control order. Extending the maximum duration of control orders against young people can facilitate more effective interventions by supporting longer term engagement, intervention, rehabilitation and reintegration measures.</para>
<para>Evidence based intervention and deradicalisation programs exist. By extending the duration in which they are able to be worked through with an at-risk individual means a greater chance of effectiveness. Strengthening the investigative capabilities of our key intelligence agencies and police is of vital importance. That is why the bill amends the Surveillance Devices Act and the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act to strengthen the control order framework.</para>
<para>The amendments allow agencies to obtain warrants for information that will help determine whether a control order is necessary in cases of serious terrorist offenders nearing release from custody. This maintains existing operational capability with control orders, rather than extended supervision orders as, the primary mechanism for imposing conditions on serious offenders while also maintaining existing warrant thresholds, reporting obligations and terrorist oversight arrangements.</para>
<para>Terrorism does not respect borders, be they national or between states and territories. Terror thrives in the gaps between agencies. It exploits boundaries, shelters behind fragmented records and conceals its movements between jurisdictional silos. For too long our laws governing the sharing of criminal history, firearm registration and intelligence data between Commonwealth agencies and state police forces have suffered from rigid statutory constraints. In an era of fast-moving, multijurisdictional threats, seamless information sharing is an operational necessity in preventing future attacks and keeping Australians safe.</para>
<para>This bill knocks down barriers that prevent information about findings of guilt where no conviction has been recorded from being considered in control order and postsentence order proceedings. Such information can be highly relevant in assessing risk and determining the propriety of certain conditions. The amendments do not change the legal thresholds for obtaining control or postsentence orders; they simply ensure that courts have access to all of the relevant information necessary to make informed decisions. State and territory agencies may hold information that is relevant to whether a control order is necessary. While these amendments do not compel information sharing, they allow states and territories to disclose information where appropriate to support informed decision-making and risk assessment.</para>
<para>Every power extended or modified under this legislation remains subject to rigorous legal safeguards. Control orders and postsentence orders are not issued by police directives or politicians. They are ordered by independent judges and based on strict evidential standards. The provisions in these bills will ensure that judges have the requisite information to make decisions that are in the public interest and that properly appreciate the relevant factors in assessing risks to public safety.</para>
<para>The tragedy at Bondi Beach showed us the darkest aspects of extremism and radicalisation, but it also revealed the best of Australian spirit—those first responders who ran toward danger without a moment's hesitation and those who wrapped their arms around the Jewish community. There was the community of southern Sydney, who all gathered around the shop of Ahmed al-Ahmed to lay flowers and honour the bravery that Ahmed al-Ahmed showed in protecting the innocent from the attacks of the terrorist at Bondi.</para>
<para>This bill is balanced, this bill is proportionate and this bill plays a vital role in ensuring the continued safety and security of Australians into the future. That's why I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We say that there is no greater responsibility for any government than to protect its citizens. That's very true, but what we saw in Bondi last year in December is an example of where there was a collective failure on the part of our intelligence agencies and our police. Let's face it: it was a failure. It resulted in the death of 15 people—it's incredibly sad—who were there to enjoy Hanukkah, a religious festival for Jewish people.</para>
<para>I won't go into too much detail because, obviously, it's the subject of a royal commission, but I'm looking forward to seeing the results and recommendations of that royal commission so that governments across this country and our intelligence agencies and our law enforcement can properly assess and ensure that Bondi never happens again. Between the intention to keep Australians safe and the capacity to do so sits a body of law. Maintaining that law—</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 17:16 to 17:28</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Maintaining that law is parliament's responsibility. It means ensuring that police, intelligence and security agencies have the lawful powers they need to prevent terrorist acts, disrupt those who would facilitate them and manage the ongoing risk posed by serious terrorist offenders.</para>
<para>The Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 comes before the House in a serious and evolving security environment. Australia's national terrorism threat level remains at 'probable'. ASIO has warned that more Australians are being radicalised, that radicalisation is occurring more quickly and that children and young people are increasingly exposed to violent extremist ideologies.</para>
<para>The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House. Many of the powers extended by this bill were created and strengthened by coalition governments. They are important national security powers. They must not be allowed to lapse. But support for necessary counterterrorism powers is not a blank cheque for government. Labor has serious questions to answer about why it waited until only months before these powers expire to introduce this legislation. There is a pattern of conduct here. The government knew these powers were due to expire on 7 December 2026. Labor legislated that sunset date in 2023. It has had the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor's review of the post-sentence order regime since March 2023. Yet Labor did not table its response until 12 August 2026, the day it introduced this bill.</para>
<para>Parliament must have time to scrutinise laws that affect both community safety and individual liberty. As the Deputy Chair of the PJCIS, I constantly get bills that are pushed before the committee with unrealistic timeframes by this government, allowing insufficient time for stakeholders to have their important say on important legislation. The government cannot present major counterterrorism changes and expect parliament to wave them through because it has allowed time to run down. That is why the coalition will use the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security process to test the government's proposals and hear directly from the AFP, ASIO and other intelligence agencies. The central test is pretty simple: does this legislation keep Australians safer? Where that question cannot be answered clearly, the government must prove its case.</para>
<para>The bill extends key counterterrorism powers and frameworks for three years, until 7 December 2029. They include control orders under division 104 of the Criminal Code, preventative detention orders under division 105, post-sentence orders for serious terrorist offenders under division 105A, and police powers under division 3A of part IAA of the Crimes Act. These provisions can be mistaken for administrative housekeeping until an agency needs them. In reality, they are practical capabilities designed to manage terrorism risks.</para>
<para>Control orders allow a court to impose tailored restrictions where necessary to protect the public from a terrorist act, prevent support for terrorism or prevent hostile activity overseas. They can regulate movement, communication, association, technology use and other activities. Preventative detention orders provide a short term capability in exceptional circumstances. They can permit detention for up to 48 hours to prevent an imminent terrorist act or preserve evidence after an attack. The post-sentence order regime addresses the continuing risk posed by certain terrorist offenders at the end of their custodial sentence. The Crimes Act also contains emergency powers that can be vital in responding to terrorism related threats, including powers to stop, question and search people in defined circumstances.</para>
<para>These powers are subject to statutory thresholds, safeguards and judicial oversight. They are extraordinary powers for extraordinary circumstances, but they must remain available when the threat requires them. The coalition supports their continuation. The coalition built much of this legal architecture—control orders and preventative detention orders in 2005, continuing detention orders in 2016, temporary exclusion orders in 2019 and extended supervision orders in 2021. These are practical, lawful powers to manage serious terrorism risks, backed by appropriate oversight. But, when the threat environment changes, the law must be able to respond likewise. Where the government proposes to replace an existing framework, it must demonstrate that it is not diminishing Australia's ability to manage risk.</para>
<para>That is particularly important in relation to the bill's changes to post-sentence arrangements for serious terrorist offenders. The current regime includes continuing detention orders and extended supervision orders. An extended supervision order allows court supervised conditions to be imposed on a person in the community. It can operate for up to three years, it can be renewed if the legal requirements continue to be met, and it is subject to annual review.</para>
<para>The government proposes to reposition control orders as the primary mechanism for imposing conditions on serious terrorist offenders after release. Under the proposed model, an extended supervision order would not be available as a direct first-instance application by the AFP minister. Instead, it would be considered as an alternative where a court is considering a continuing detention order but is not satisfied that the detention threshold has been met.</para>
<para>The government says operational capability will be preserved. The coalition's response is simple: prove it. Before parliament proceeds, we need to know whether operational agencies support the new structure, whether any practical capability available under the existing framework will be lost, how an offender who continues to pose a serious risk as a control order approaches expiry will be managed and whether the framework supports the intelligence and surveillance work needed for future applications. These matters go directly to Australia's capacity to manage the risk posed by people convicted of serious terrorism offences after they leave prison.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 creates warrant powers intended to assist agencies in deciding whether to seek a control order for an offender nearing the end of a sentence, but the relevant warrants are available while the offender remains in custody or under a detention order. Parliament should test whether the AFP and ASIO are satisfied that adequate intelligence and surveillance capability remains available once an offender returns to the community. Australia should not surrender an existing national security capability unless what it is replaced with keeps Australians at least as safe, if not safer.</para>
<para>One of the most disturbing developments in the current security environment is the radicalisation of children and young Australians. Youth radicalisation is a present and alarming challenge. ASIO has warned that radicalisation is accelerating and minors are increasingly embracing violent extremism. The government's own figures show that around half of people identified in programs to counter violent extremism are under 24, that 31 per cent are under 18 and that eight per cent are aged between just 10 and 14. Prevention, early intervention, online safety, family support and deradicalisation must be a national priority.</para>
<para>The bill itself reflects the seriousness of this trend. Currently, confirmed control orders for young people aged 14 to 17 are subject to a special maximum duration of just three months. The bill removes that limit, meaning the general maximum period of 12 months would apply—that is, the same as for an adult. The coalition will examine this measure carefully. Strong powers should be available where necessary to protect the community and prevent serious harm.</para>
<para>But it's important to say what this amendment does and does not do. It does not make control orders available for children under 14. It does not mean every young person will receive a 12-month order. Courts retain discretion over the duration and conditions of an order, and the best interests of the young person remain a primary consideration. The amendment removes the special three-month maximum and permits the ordinary maximum to apply, subject to judicial discretion and statutory safeguards.</para>
<para>The coalition supports necessary and proportionate powers, but legal powers alone are not a youth deradicalisation strategy. The government must also demonstrate that prevention and deradicalisation programs are effective, properly targeted and capable of intervening before a young person moves from online exposure to extremist ideology, planning or, worse, violence.</para>
<para>This bill also comes before the House in the context of serious questions about Labor's wider approach to terrorism linked Australians returning from Syria. The coalition's position is clear: the Commonwealth should have the strongest lawful control possible over when and how terrorism linked Australians return.</para>
<para>In October 2022, the Albanese government repatriated four Australian women and 13 children from Syria. It argued a planned return was safer because the Commonwealth could control and manage the process. But Labor later changed course. The AFP commissioner confirmed at Senate estimates that Labor adopted a policy of so-called self-managed returns. In effect, the government would not—allegedly—assist people to leave, but, if they made their own way out and arrived in Australia, it would deal with them then. That is not a coherent national security strategy. It means the Commonwealth does not control departure, route, timing or circumstances of return. It manages the consequences once people arrive. That creates obvious questions about risk assessments, intelligence coverages and operational control.</para>
<para>In May, four women and nine children returned. Three women were arrested on arrival, one was charged with alleged membership of a terrorist organisation and entering or remaining in a declared area, and two were charged with alleged crimes against humanity involving slavery. Those allegations are before the courts, and each person is, of course, entitled to the presumption of innocence, but Australians are entitled to know what assessments were made, what powers were considered and why the Commonwealth did not retain greater control over these returns.</para>
<para>The temporary exclusion order regime was established by the coalition because, where the legal threshold is met, the Commonwealth must retain the capacity to control the timing and conditions of a terrorism linked Australian's return. The coalition also introduced the Criminal Code Amendment (Keeping Australia Safe) Bill 2026. Labor voted that legislation down. Australians deserve a government that plans properly, acts early and gives police and intelligence agencies the tools they need before a risk becomes urgent. The coalition will not oppose this bill, because the powers it extends are important and necessary and should not be allowed to lapse, but the government should not confuse support for these powers with approval of Labor's handling of national security.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026. Unfortunately, this place has not yet had the benefit of the findings of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security on this bill. I respectfully ask all members in this place to support my amendment that I'll be discussing in consideration in detail on this bill. I also request that the committee that I referred to consider further broadening my amendment to incorporate all terrorism offences. I must say I do reserve the right to bring a private member's bill to that effect into this place to ensure that, where there is a guilty finding for terrorism, there must be a conviction.</para>
<para>Today's bill, coupled with my amendment, would strengthen—and will strengthen—protections for the Australian community against terrorism. First, to this bill—the bill amends multiple pieces of legislation, including the Criminal Code Act 1995 and the Crimes Act 1914. It will extend the operation of control orders, preventive detention orders and post-sentence orders that are due to expire on 7 December this year, and it will allow them to be further expanded for three years.</para>
<para>Control orders are not used lightly. They are issued by courts on application from the Australian Federal Police with consent of the Attorney-General to prevent terrorist activity and to protect the public. They can prevent a person from leaving Australia, being in certain places, associating with certain people, carrying out activities under certain items and accessing forms of technology such as the internet. They can, for example, require a person to be wearing a tracking device or require someone to report at a certain time. In line with the increasing use of such orders to manage the risk posed by serious terrorist offenders, the bill will strengthen control orders and adapt them better to the probable terrorist threat.</para>
<para>It will ensure that information about a person found guilty of an offence without conviction can be considered and disclosed in control and post-sentence order applications and proceedings where relevant, support improved voluntary information sharing between states and territories and the Commonwealth for the purpose of control orders, and provide for issuing of electronic surveillance warrants in relation to serious terrorist offenders in custody in relation to control order applications against those offenders. It will improve the Criminal Code terrorist organisation listing framework to allow for delisting and expand the protections of United Nations personnel.</para>
<para>This bill has been introduced by the government in the context of a national terrorism threat level of 'probable'. This means that there's a chance of more than 50 per cent, more likely than not, of an onshore terrorist attack in Australia or plans for such an attack in the next 12 months. The tragedy of Bondi and the subsequent royal commission demonstrate that the terrorist threat to us as Australian citizens is all too real. We have an urgent responsibility to do as much as possible to bring the risk level down and keep our communities safe from terrorism.</para>
<para>The Department of Home Affairs reports that there are 298 people in the Countering Violent Extremism deradicalisation program. Concerningly, that's up from 253 individuals in December last year, an increase of nearly 20 per cent in a period of six months. It's hard to believe that there are so many people on Australian soil enjoying living in Australia who hate this place so much. This group is made up predominantly of younger males. Deradicalisation is complex and costly, and success is not assured. In the 2026-27 budget program, $74 million was allocated over two years, such as the National Support and Intervention Program, and $25 million this year was allocated to national initiatives countering violent extremism.</para>
<para>I was surprised that the government's bill included a provision to ensure that information about a person found guilty of an offence without conviction can be considered and disclosed in control order and post-sentence order applications and proceedings where relevant. It begs the question of how there could be a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt for the most serious offence I can imagine—an offence of terror against our nation, our government and our communities—yet a court could proceed to dismiss such a charge without conviction.</para>
<para>My amendment, as I'll discuss in consideration in detail, would disapply section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 so that it's not available in relation to a person found guilty of a terrorist act under section 101.1 of the Criminal Code. If charges are proven and a person is found guilty but the charges are dismissed and the person is discharged without proceeding to conviction, it means that, even though they've been proven guilty to the requisite standard of proof, no conviction would be recorded. Standard police checks will not show the finding of guilt for such an offence, because there will be nothing on their formal criminal record.</para>
<para>That affects employment. Just think; a person can then have a blank sheet, walk into a childcare centre and work. They can walk into aged care, NDIS—vulnerable people. They've been found guilty of a terrorism offence or pleaded guilty to a terrorism offence and have no conviction. In immigration terms, not having a conviction recorded may be of benefit to noncitizens, even if they are permanent residents. They would face mandatory visa cancellation or deportation if convicted of a serious offence. Already, the section 19B discretion is not allowed to proceed with respect to the Migration Act, where there are people-smuggling offences and findings of guilt. There are other examples at a state level.</para>
<para>Terrorism is sadly something that we live with now. We didn't have to live with it decades ago. Australia was a much safer place than it is today. The primary consideration must be the protection of the Australian community from criminals and other serious conduct where guilt of a terrorist offence has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. I commend this bill to the House and look forward to discussing my amendment in consideration in detail.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROWLAND</name>
    <name.id>159771</name.id>
    <electorate>Greenway</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank my parliamentary colleagues for their contributions to the debate on this bill, the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 . The Australian government's first priority is the safety of all Australians and protecting the values we all hold dear. This bill makes targeted amendments informed by operational experience to ensure Australia's counterterrorism powers remain available, effective and proportionate. These changes are informed by the advice of law enforcement on their operational experience in responding to the current threat environment.</para>
<para>The bill extends the sunset date for key counterterrorism frameworks. It streamlines and enhances frameworks for responding to high-risk terrorist offenders. It strengthens the control-order framework and its application to young people and improves information-sharing provisions in the control-order and post-sentence-order frameworks. It also makes technical amendments to improve the framework for listing terrorist organisations. Finally, the amendments give effect to Australia's obligations under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel.</para>
<para>The amendments in this bill are a proportionate and targeted response to the challenging terrorism threat environment facing Australia. The bill maintains and enhances critical counterterrorism powers and forms part of the government's continuing and holistic efforts to protect Australians from the threat of terrorism. We must stand in unity against that threat. I look forward to support for this bill from across the parliament.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>184</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Page 48 (after line 27), at the end of the Bill, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 9 — Convictions for terrorist offences</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Crimes Act 1914</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 At the end of section 19B</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Exception</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">terrorist acts</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply in relation to a charge for an offence against section 101.1 of the <inline font-style="italic">Criminal Code </inline>(which makes it an offence to engage in a terrorist act within the meaning of Part 5.3 of the <inline font-style="italic">Criminal Code</inline>).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 Application of amendment</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The amendment made by this Schedule applies in relation to a charge for an offence if the charge is made on or after the commencement of this Schedule.</para></quote>
<para>A 'terrorist act', under section 100.1 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, is an act or a threat to act intended to advance a political, religious or ideological cause; intimidate the public or coerce or influence by intimidation a government; cause death or serious harm, or endanger the life of a person; cause serious property damage; create a serious risk to the health or safety of the public; or seriously interfere with, disrupt or destroy critical infrastructure such as telecommunications or electricity networks.</para>
<para>In Australia right now, a person can actually be found guilty or plead guilty to a terrorist act where they prepared or planned a terrorist act, and yet, under section 19B of the Crimes Act, while there is that guilt, there does not necessarily need to be a conviction. I completely accept and understand the principle of judicial discretion. However, there are some crimes against the nation that are so heinous, so disgusting, so morally depraved, that that discretion must be removed.</para>
<para>We already have a precedent for this. We have in the Migration Act that, if you are found guilty of people-smuggling as an adult, a conviction must be recorded against you. How can it be that we don't have that same rule apply with respect to terrorism? If we truly want to send a very clear message to people in this nation who seek to harm our nation, who in their radical religious ideology or political ideology decide that they are going to commit a terrorist offence and are found guilty of that terrorist offence, surely there must be a conviction. That's not necessarily a custodial sentence. That's saying 'a conviction'.</para>
<para>If we are truly serious about terrorism in our nation, we must draw a line and say, 'There must be a conviction recorded,' because, when a conviction is recorded against your police clearance sheet for a police search, we then provide that information to everyone else in society who needs it. Say that person who's been found guilty of an offence of terrorism goes and works, as I said, in a hospital or an aged-care home, or say maybe they want to work in the NDIS—and goodness knows we've seen enough fraud and bad things in that section! They would walk in with a clean rap sheet. How can that be? How can we say, 'Yes, that's fine; that's normal'? Well, I can tell you: that does not pass the pub test.</para>
<para>Australians expect more from this place. They expect more from their government in protecting them, and in standing and drawing an absolute line against this behaviour.</para>
<para>We saw, last year, the most horrific act against Australians at Bondi. One small thing that we could do from that is to say: 'You know what? If you are found guilty of a terrorism offence in Australia, we are going to treat this seriously. We're going to ensure that a conviction is imposed.' That is what we must do as a nation.</para>
<para>I think this has to be a complete oversight. Maybe that was because we had not had terrorism on our shores. But we do now.</para>
<para>Now, I'm sure the government's probably going to say, 'Well, 19B hasn't been used for a terrorism offence.' But that doesn't mean it won't be. So let's take that away.</para>
<para>Let's put Australians first. Let's put the safety of Australians first. Let's close this loophole now, just like we have for people-smuggling. We expect better, and we must act in this place to create better.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 and to speak in support of the member for Mayo and these very important amendments that she brings to the House, because not only is the member for Mayo an outstanding parliamentarian; the member for Mayo is also a law student. She is a very capable law student who has found an open gate, an open door, a void, in the law. You can see why the member for Mayo has a distinction average in her legal studies, because she's identified this open gate in the law that terrorists are able to walk through.</para>
<para>I think most Australians would think that, if you are found guilty of a terrorist offence in a court of law in this country, there needs to be a conviction recorded. It's a very simple proposition. We are talking about some of the most serious crimes—crimes against our citizens; crimes against our country. Most Australians would think: 'If you're found guilty of terrorism, then you should have the book thrown at you.' And I agree with them. You shouldn't be able to walk out of court without a conviction being recorded. This is about keeping Australians safe and this is about keeping our country safe. If you are found guilty of these extraordinarily serious offences, then you don't just get to walk away. If you're found guilty of a terrorist offence, then you need to wear that; you need to own it. You need to be called a terrorist and identified as a terrorist, because, as the member for Mayo points out, you don't just get to slip away into the wider, law-abiding society without people knowing that you have been found guilty of a terror offence.</para>
<para>So I commend the member for Mayo for bringing these very important amendments, and I would urge all members to support them. I think most right-thinking members of this House could get behind these amendments. I would urge all members of the opposition, the crossbench but also the government to get behind these amendments. Most right-thinking Australians would support them. All law abiding Australians would support them—the very simple proposition that, if you are found guilty, then you get the conviction recorded; you don't get to slip quietly into the night once your day in court is finished. I commend these amendments to the House and I urge all members to support.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROWLAND</name>
    <name.id>159771</name.id>
    <electorate>Greenway</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I acknowledge the amendments moved by the member for Mayo and the constructive engagement she has had with my office on its substance. The government will not be supporting the amendments. To be clear, the government believes that a conviction for a terrorist act is a very serious matter and should be recorded.</para>
<para>We believe the existing regime is appropriately balanced and targeted. Section 16A of the Crimes Act 1914 requires that, in determining the sentence to be passed in respect of any person for a federal offence, a court must impose a sentence of a severity appropriate in all the circumstances of the offence. Among other factors, the court must have regard to the nature and circumstances of the offence. In addition, section 19B of the Crimes Act provides that a court may make an order discharging a person without proceeding to conviction if satisfied that it would be inexpedient to inflict anything other than a nominal punishment or that it is expedient to release the offender on probation. In determining whether to make such an order, the court must have regard to the character and other circumstances of the person, the extent to which the offence is of a trivial nature or the extent to which the offence was committed under extenuating circumstances.</para>
<para>As a reminder, the offence for committing a terrorist act carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. In fact, all terrorism offences other than the offences for associating with a terrorist organisation carry a mandatory minimum of six years imprisonment, clearly indicating the inherent seriousness of these offences. Given the seriousness of terrorism offending, it is therefore highly unlikely that an order discharging a person with no conviction could ever be an appropriately severe penalty.</para>
<para>As the member for Mayo has been informed and as she has noted, I am advised that there has never been an order under section 19B to discharge someone from conviction for committing a terrorist act. For these reasons, the government will not be supporting the amendments. But again we note that these matters will be examined by the PJCIS and we look forward to its findings.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question unresolved.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 1 8 :03</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>