Hansard / archived / read-only

Here is a complete explanation of the workings of TransformOne, broken into:

1. Downward Pass
2. Return Up
3. General Role of Local Methods
4. General Role of Global Methods

This reflects the logic as implemented in your code.

1. On the Downward Pass

When TransformOne descends into a JSON tree:

• It recurses depth-first on each value inside a dictionary or list.
• It builds up a cleaned or transformed copy (NewDict or NewList) from each child.

• While descending, it tracks:

  • ContextPath: the exact nested key path (e.g., ["speech", "talk.text", "p"])
  • ParentKey: the key of the immediate parent, useful in list contexts

It applies the Local pass of each method to each child element individually, via:

python JsonClean = TransformOne(Value, ...) Operation, NewValue = Method({Key: JsonClean}, "Local", ...)

This is before the parent object is evaluated as a whole.

1. As It Returns Up

Once all children are processed:

• The newly rebuilt NewDict or NewList is passed to the Global phase of the method:

python Operation, NewValue = Method(NewDict, "Global", ...)

• Depending on the Operation, the result may:

  • Be returned as-is (KEEP)
  • Be replaced with a new object (REPLACE)
  • Be promoted to a higher context (PROMOTE)
  • Be omitted entirely (OMIT)

For strings, only "Local" is applied (no recursion possible).

1. General Operation of Local Methods

Local methods are applied before recursion returns — i.e., to each individual field or element.

They are typically used for:

• Cleaning or simplifying structure:

  • TransDeEmpty removes empty values.
  • TransPromoteText unwraps dicts like {"text": "..."}.

• Flattening or stripping:

  • TransStripStyle removes formatting keys.
  • TransSpanToStr converts spans to plain text.

Key characteristics:

• Work on atomic or shallow units (e.g., dicts with 1–2 keys).
• Often detect single-key wrappers and unwrap them.
• Replace or promote parts of a structure before the whole is evaluated.

1. General Operation of Global Methods

Global methods are applied after all children have been transformed, to the entire rebuilt structure.

They are typically used for:

• Semantic promotion:

  • TransPromoteTalkText merges talk.start + talk.text → Speech.
  • TransPromoteUtterance pulls embedded utterance up a level.

• Structure replacement:

  • TransDebateInfo chooses title or type from a whole block.
  • TransRoleTextMetadata discards wrapper and keeps text.

Key characteristics:

• Work on entire structures with meaningful content.
• Can inspect multiple fields at once.
• Usually handle semantic retyping or merging based on known XML patterns.

Summary Table

Let me know if you want this exported into a TransformLogic.md or inserted as docstring scaffolding.

• Thursday, 31 July 2025
• The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sue Lines ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

• The Clerk: I table documents pursuant to statute as listed on the Dynamic Red.
• Full details of the documents are recorded in the . Journals of the Senate

• The Clerk: Proposals to meet have been lodged as follows:
• Community Affairs Legislation Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 4 pm.
• Environment and Communications Legislation and References Committees -- private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 12.45 pm.
• Human Rights -- Joint Statutory Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 10.30 am.
• Law Enforcement -- Joint Statutory Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 10 am.
• Migration -- Joint Standing Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 12.15 pm.
• Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 09:01, page 1 / 09:01 (): If there is no objection, the meetings are authorised.

• Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 09:01, page 1 / 09:01 (): The Senate will now consider a motion to be moved by Senator Thorpe. Before you move your motion, Senator Thorpe, may I remind you that it's fine to have a message stick in the Senate, but the procedure is that you advise me and the Deputy Clerk of your intention to bring a message stick into the chamber. Thank you. 1 min
• Thorpe, Sen Lidia, Victoria, IND, 09:02, page 1 5 min [22]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 09:02 ( -- ) (): Thank you, President. I move:
  • That the Senate --
  • (a) notes that on 27 May 2025, 24-year-old disabled Warlpiri-Luritja man Kumanjayi White died a tragic death under police restraint inside a supermarket in Mparntwe/Alice Springs;
  • (b) extends its deepest sympathies to the family of Kumanjayi White and the Yuendumu community;
  • (c) notes that 17 First Nations people have died in custody this year and extends its deepest sympathies to the families of these people;
  • (d) resolves that all parliamentarians will work constructively together to address the over-incarceration of First Nations people and deaths in custody; and
  • (e) calls on the Government to:
  • (i) support Kumanjayi White's family, and note their request for:
  • (A) the re-establishment of community-control and self-determination in the Northern Territory, and
  • (B) the reversal of interventionist policies introduced under the NT Intervention and subsequent Stronger Futures legislation 18 years ago;
  • (ii) ensure there is appropriate support for the impacted family, for sorry business and during the coronial inquest, and necessary legal support,
  • (iii) continue to work with states and territories to:
  • (A) implement recommendations from the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, and
  • (B) ensure appropriate conduct of investigations into First Nations deaths in custody and monitor progress of recommendations made to the Government relating to deaths in custody.
  • I have put forward this motion with the intention of bringing this chamber together on something that is very important to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and it should be very important for this nation. This isn't about politics or pointscoring; it's about compassion. It's about our shared duty as parliamentarians to ensure that justice and dignity are extended to all people on this continent.
  • On 27 May this year, during Reconciliation Week, 24-year-old Warlpiri man Kumanjayi White died under police restraint in a Coles supermarket. He was a young man with a disability. He was deeply loved. His death was preventable. This motion extends the Senate's deepest sympathies to his family, to the Yuendumu community, to the families of the 17 First Peoples who've died in custody this year and to the families of all those who have died since the 1991 royal commission. These are not just statistics; they are sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, cousins, siblings and grandchildren lost to a system that continues to harm our people.
  • Ned Hargraves, a senior Warlpiri elder and the grandfather of Kumanjayi White, spoke for many when he said: 'We are devastated by this death. My jaja was vulnerable and needed support, not to be criminalised because of his disability.' Ned has called for answers, respect and justice, not just for his family but for all families still waiting for change and for those who live in fear that their loved ones will be next.
  • This motion calls on the government to ensure the family is supported over the coming months, with assistance for sorry business, the coronial inquest and legal support. That is the very least we can do. But it also asks this parliament to do something bigger: to work together to end the crisis of deaths in custody and the overincarceration of First Peoples in this country. This is not a partisan issue or one for states and territories alone. It is a national responsibility -- a moral one. The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody in 1991 made clear what needs to be done, yet, decades later, those recommendations remain largely unimplemented and ignored. Meanwhile, families continue to bury their loved ones.
  • This motion is about committing to practical, overdue action, supported by evidence and backed by First Peoples. It calls for federal leadership that works with states and territories to ensure that every death in custody is properly investigated, that recommendations are tracked and implemented and that families are treated with respect and dignity.
  • I speak not only as a senator but as someone who has lived through this pain. My cousin Josh Kerr died in custody in 2022. I grew up with his mum, Donnis. She's family to me. She told me about saying, 'I love you,' for the last time while Josh was in shackles, about their last hug and about how the system took him from her, just like it had taken her from her own parents -- a cycle of grief that has never been broken. This is our reality.
  • This motion is about preventing the pain from continuing. It's about doing what we can here and now to ensure that Kumanjayi's death is not just another entry in a long and shameful list. It must be a turning point. I urge all senators and those in the other place to support this motion. Let us stand together. Choose justice and honour. Honour Kumanjayi White's memory by committing to real change.
  • When I first came into the Senate, I did bring in this message stick with 441 markings to mark 441 deaths in custody. Today we have 602 deaths in custody, after a royal commission. When will this end? This is our message to this parliament: stop killing us. Stop killing us.
• Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, 09:07, page 2 5 min [7]
  • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 09:07 ( -- ) (): On behalf of the government I offer my condolences to the family of Kumanjayi White, who died in police custody in Alice Springs on 27 May this year. I acknowledge the distress felt by the community of Yuendumu, who know too well the loss of a young person in police custody. This continues to be a difficult time for many. I know that the Minister for Indigenous Australians, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, was in contact with the families of Yuendumu immediately after the tragedy. Her deep connection to remote communities in the Territory ensures their voices are carried not just into this chamber but to the cabinet table.
  • In the two months since the event, we have seen vigils held all over the country. Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians alike have stood together to demand better from all levels of government. In June, the minister took these calls to the Joint Council on Closing the Gap, where First Nations peak organisations and all Australian governments are represented. She's also working closely with the Attorney-General for plans to raise the issue at the Standing Council of Attorneys-General in August.
  • It is simply unacceptable that 602 First Nations people have died in custody since the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. The royal commission was clear that the best way to reduce First Nations deaths in custody is to reduce the high incarceration rate of First Nations people, including through social and economic responses, which the evidence shows can reduce crime, change the course of lives and avoid people coming into contact with the police or justice system in the first place.
  • This is what the Commonwealth government is focusing on, including through the National Agreement on Closing the Gap. We are investing in First Nations led justice reinvestment initiatives nationally. In the Northern Territory we're already seeing results. On Groote Eylandt there has been a huge decline in offending, with crime rates now at an all-time low. There were 130 offences recorded in the last 12 months, compared to more than 1,000 in 2019. We are supporting the Justice Policy Partnership to bring together all levels of government and peak organisations to improve justice outcomes for First Nations people. We are increasing investment under the National Access to Justice Partnership 2025-30 to ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples receive proper legal assistance. We need more action by states and territories to keep First Nations people out of justice systems and ensure they are safe when in custody; this is their responsibility in the federation. The Commonwealth will continue to use forums such as the Standing Council of Attorneys-General and the Police Ministers Council to work on reform.
  • The Australian government is investing in the areas that we know will help keep Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people out of the justice system, like housing, jobs, education and health. Closing the gap in these key areas, along with economic empowerment, is key to breaking cycles of incarceration and reincarceration. In the Northern Territory, over 220 houses were built in remote communities last year, and 206 houses were built in the previous year. On jobs, we are delivering the Remote Jobs and Economic Development program by creating 3,000 jobs in remote communities. We are training the next generation of First Nations health workers to create jobs, expand access to local services and deliver on our commitment to train 500 First Nations health workers. The Australian government is also doubling its investment in Northern Territory public schools over the next five years, meaning that all Northern Territory schools will be fully and fairly funded by 2029.
  • These investments are building the foundation that will help prevent people from coming into contact with the justice system in the first place. The government is working to keep people out of the justice system and ensure they are safe when in custody. But, when there are steps backwards, we need to call them out and listen to those calling for change. Minister McCarthy has encouraged the Northern Territory government to carefully review Coroner Armitage's recent report into the death of another young man in Yuendumu and to consider the coroner's recommendations in full. These independent processes are key to identifying and fixing the causes of these unacceptable deaths in custody. Recent deaths in custody have compounded the collective grief and trauma felt by many First Nations families.
  • Finally, I return to Kumanjayi White, a young man who has tragically died. On behalf of the government, I again extend my deepest condolences to his family and the community of Yuendumu, who have suffered too much.
• Liddle, Sen Kerrynne, South Australia, LP, 09:12, page 3 5 min [8]
  • South Australia 09:12 () (): Well, every death, of course, is a tragedy. There is much to explain about how Kumanjayi White became another statistic to be investigated as a death in custody, but that focus is not for us in here. Kumanjayi's grieving family deserve answers. I acknowledge their immense grief. Australians too deserve answers.
  • The recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, released in 1991, outlined what needed to be done. Indigenous Australians were disproportionately incarcerated, and they were also overrepresented in the numbers of deaths in custody. The royal commission report was a blueprint for change. Change then was necessary. Thirty-four years later, the job is still not done. The Australian Institute of Criminology says there have been 60 deaths in custody so far this year, including 17 of Indigenous people.
  • In the Northern Territory, legislation and police procedure dictate how deaths in custody are investigated. This includes oversight by the police Professional Standards Command, along with separate police and coronial investigations, and there is potential for further independent inquiry through an ombudsman and/or the NT ICAC.
  • In June, the Prime Minister said he needed to be convinced that people in Canberra know better than people in the Northern Territory about how to deal with these issues. As is appropriate, I will wait for those processes to conclude, but, in my role as shadow minister for Indigenous Australians, I will reflect on the protective factors -- some of which are provided by good policy and programs -- that clearly failed Kumanjayi White and, in so many ways, so many others.
  • Late last night, the most recent Closing the Gap report was publicly released. It is 157 pages of data, statistics and commentary, but behind all of those statistics and all of that data are real people living and struggling with issues that many of us in here don't live every day. The Productivity Commission reports annually on progress to enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and governments to work together to achieve life outcomes equality for Indigenous Australians. The terrible truth is that gap is not closing the way that was expected. There are 19 targets, and only four are on track. Another four are going in the wrong direction.
  • The report is yet another sobering reminder of how little progress is being made. It is a picture of missed opportunity, low expectations and tangible failure for delivering results, for which all parliaments and all parties have a responsibility. But the reality is too that it's everyone's responsibility. For every year progress is not made, existing disadvantage is entrenched, suffering is prolonged and confidence in government is undermined. And, worse still, another new generation starts with an even bigger struggle than the previous one.
  • For the government, four key targets that were already going backwards continue to worsen: adult incarceration, children commencing school developmentally on track, children in out-of-home care and suicide. Law and order, addressing family violence, and hope are central to securing better outcomes. That comes with focus on one of the most important protective factors -- family. But family can't do it alone.
  • (Time expired) When I was shadow minister for child protection and the prevention of family violence, it was clear that addressing violence and the known drivers of it would go a long way towards change. That requires tough decisions in here and by governments. It requires doing things that do good over things that make us feel good. We watched alcohol restrictions in the Northern Territory lapse in 2022, making central Australia less safe for everyone. It was also catastrophic in its impact on all of the social determinants of health. In the month that followed, domestic violence assaults in Alice Springs leapt 77 per cent, leaving lasting consequences for those who live locally. We saw the NAAJA, the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency, in freefall because of poor governance, and, without early intervention, people were left unrepresented. As parliamentarians, a greater focus of our work must be on prevention and early intervention. There is so much focus on justice and incarceration, but, if individuals have come into contact with the justice system, the reality is we've already failed them. When they are captured by the cycle of release and return, then we fail them again. To deliver change, you need to do the hard stuff. That's why the gap is not closing.
• Waters, Sen Larissa, Queensland, AG, 09:17, page 4 5 min [10]
  • Queensland Leader of the Australian Greens 09:17 ( -- ) (): The Greens strongly support this motion. On Tuesday 27 May, a 24-year-old Warlpiri man from Yuendumu, Kumanjayi White, died in custody after being restrained by plain-clothes NT police members inside the Coles supermarket in Mparntwe/Alice Springs. He was a young man living with a disability, and he was in town accessing care and services. Our hearts go out to Mr White's family, friends and community. I cannot imagine the grief and loss that they're experiencing at this time. The Australian Greens offer our deepest condolences and wish them the space and the time for grief and mourning. We stand in solidarity with the Yuendumu and Warlpiri communities. We join their calls for justice, and we echo the family's demands for an independent investigation, for the officers involved to be stood down, for the release of CCTV and body camera footage and for the Northern Territory police to apologise for and cease publicly criminalising Kumanjayi White in their statements.
  • This week, we learned, according to the Australian Institute of Criminology's live dashboard, that there have been 602 First Nations deaths in custody since the royal commission concluded in 1991. It is a shameful indictment on us all that so many of the recommendations from that royal commission remain unfulfilled. This government and this parliament must be leaders who push our states and territories to do more until we implement those recommendations in full and address the structural racism that exists in the justice system.
  • Kumanjayi White's death occurred as the final coronial report on the 2019 death in custody of another Warlpiri man, Kumanjayi Walker, was due to be published. That inquest exposed deep failures of justice and found the Northern Territory police to be 'an organisation with hallmarks of institutional racism'. In the NT, 84 per cent of incarcerated adults are Aboriginal, despite Aboriginal adults only making up 25.9 per cent of the NT adult population. One hundred per cent of young people imprisoned in the Northern Territory are Aboriginal. Many of those adults and young people are on remand, yet to be convicted. These alarming trends represent a longstanding failure of the justice system to address underlying causes of harm and violence. Funding needs to shift from policing and prisons to community focused solutions led by First Nations people.
  • The family of Kumanjayi Walker and the Yuendumu community, alongside 23 Aboriginal community family violence and legal organisations, published an open letter earlier this week, calling on the Finocchiaro Northern Territory government to publicly commit to the findings and recommendations of Coroner Armitage in the coronial inquest into the death of Kumanjayi Walker and to engage with First Nations communities and the legal sector. It said, in part:
  • Aboriginal people have the solutions and now is the time to work with us to ensure that our people thrive and our children grow up safe and supported. Change is not only possible, but also well overdue.
  • ... ... ...
  • Warlpiri people and all Aboriginal people want lasting change that uplifts our people and ensures a strong, healthy future for generations to come. We do not need to be "fixed" by others -- now is the time to genuinely listen, to clear the path for our autonomy, and to provide the resources and support that will enable us to shape our own future. This is what will bring lasting solutions and restore trust. These are not only the right things to do, they are essential steps to prevent needless loss of life and build a better future for all. We are ready to work together for profound, lasting change. We urge you to act now and to act boldly.
  • The Greens strongly support their calls for an independent and robust mechanism for police accountability in the Northern Territory -- and everywhere, frankly -- and for greater investment in community-controlled services.
  • A genuine investment in community rather than policing has never been more urgent, as the NT has reduced the age of criminal responsibility to the age of 10 and they're now shamefully moving to reintroduce spit hoods, which are a recognised form of torture. And we're only on track to meet four of the 19 Closing the Gap targets. It is shameful.
  • (Time expired) We acknowledge the profound grief and anger felt by Kumanjayi Walker's family, the Warlpiri and Yuendumu communities and First Nations people across the country. We express our sorrow over his death and for the racism, violence and systemic over-incarceration of First Nations people that's led to 602 losses of life. The time to act is now.
• Pocock, Sen David, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 09:22, page 5 2 min [3]
  • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 09:22 ( -- ) (): I rise to speak in support of Senator Thorpe's motion. I would like to thank her for her tireless work on this issue and for trying to get elected representatives, our Senate and our parliament to take this more seriously after decades and decades of inaction. This is something that affects all states and territories. If you look here in the nation's capital, in the ACT, two Indigenous men died in custody within four days at Canberra's only prison in mid-February this year. We've had three deaths in custody at AMC since August 2024.
  • These deaths have rightly prompted demands from families and people in Indigenous communities for leaders to actually get on with long-overdue reform. In May 2025, the ACT government committed to establishing an independent inquiry into systemic issues concerning Indigenous detainees. This is clearly part of a bigger crisis, and I don't understand why we haven't seen more appetite from the major parties to really deal with this. Again, I thank Senator Thorpe for her work.
  • Here, in the ACT, we've seen Thomas Emerson MLA doing some great work in the legislative assembly to push the Labor government here and to actually align their actions with their rhetoric and sort this out. I'd also like to mention Julie Tongs from Winnunga. She has been a fierce voice in this debate and is constantly pushing for change, as well as people like Joe Hedger and many others who, I think, have finally got the ACT government to start to take this seriously.
• Shoebridge, Sen David, New South Wales, AG, 09:24, page 5 [5]
  • New South Wales 09:24 () (): I want to thank Senator Thorpe for bringing this motion to the chamber, and I start by joining with my party leader, my colleague Senator Waters, in expressing our deep and sincere condolences and our sympathy to the family of Kumanjayi White. Kumanjayi was a 24-year-old Warlpiri man living with disability. He went into Alice Springs to seek care and services. While he was there seeking care and services -- a story that happens so often around this country -- being a First Nations man in a shopping centre on a public street, he found himself 'restrained' -- I think that's the language the Northern Territory police used -- by two Northern Territory police in the confectionery aisle of Coles, and, as so often happens in interactions between First Nations peoples and police forces across this country, the interaction was lethal and Kumanjayi was killed as a result of the police actions, the restraint that he suffered. Did I mention that he was a 24-year-old man, a young man going to Alice to seek access to care and services? What he got was death by police in the confectionery aisle of a Coles supermarket.
  • Our thoughts and our hearts are with his family and the community. There is just so much sorry business in this country, and so much of it happens at the hands of the criminal justice system -- or, as First Nations people will tell you, the 'criminal injustice system' -- that this country has. There have been more than 600 deaths of First Nations people at the hands of the criminal justice system since the royal commission, and there are hundreds and thousands of deaths that predate that. In my home state of New South Wales, tragically, I've worked with so many families who have had their boys, their husbands, their sisters, their aunties or their cousins killed at the hands of police. I still remember the appalling way in which David Dungay was treated. He was killed by police restraint in Long Bay prison in Sydney. In the video that you see of David, who was restrained by police because he was eating a packet of biscuits, he's crying, 'I can't breathe; I can't breathe; I can't breathe; I can't breathe,' and a mob of corrections officers are forcing him down -- he can't breathe; he can't breathe -- until they killed him. To see that history being repeated in the NT, in the confectionery aisle of Coles, is obscene. Tane Chatfield, Dwayne Johnstone, Tammy Shipley, TJ Hickey, Veronica Saunders -- these names. Families, aunties -- the pain of this sorry business at the hands of the criminal justice system reaches across this country into First Nations families.
  • And, while we have been in this parliament for the last two weeks, the racist criminal justice system in the Northern Territory has ratcheted up. The Northern Territory government, instead of responding with compassion and empathy and care, are refusing to institute an independent inquiry into Kumanjayi's death. Police investigating police -- we know where that will end. Instead of meeting with the Commonwealth government and seeking the funding so support can go into First Nations led community services, diversion services and culture services -- which all the evidence says will keep communities safe, keep young First Nations kids safe and instil pride and spirit -- what has the Northern Territory government done this week? They have rammed through legislation to reintroduce spit hoods on kids, which the UN has said is torture. They've rammed through legislation to remove 'jail as the last resort' and to encourage magistrates and judges to put kids in jail. As Senator Waters made clear, the statistics say that tonight pretty much every kid in a Northern Territory jail will be a First Nations kid.
  • What has the Commonwealth done? Nada; zip; nothing. The Commonwealth government funds the Northern Territory government, by and large, to torture kids in jail. The Commonwealth government funds the Northern Territory government to not put in place independent investigations of deaths in custody. Action, Commonwealth action, using funding and legislative powers to try and do what we can to keep First Nations people safe -- that's what's needed.
  • Question agreed to.

• Victoria 09:30 () (): I seek leave to table a document, which is a list from the Israeli government's official record of Israeli civilians murdered by Hamas on and since 7 October 2023.
• Leave granted.
• I table the document.
• Continue / Henderson, Sen Sarah, Victoria, LP, page 6

• Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025 25 min [2]
  • Second Reading / Brockman, Sen Slade (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP, 09:35, page 6 / 09:35 (): The question is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Hodgins-May be agreed to. 3 min
  • In Committee 19 min [19]
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:38, page 7 / Victoria 09:38 () (): Minister, this legislation hasn't taken into account the unique operations and circumstances of Aboriginal community controlled services -- not just child care but holistic family supports and cultural strengths. What consideration was given to the impact of legislation on ACCO centres that offer more than child care and are often community and service hubs? 1 min
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:39, page 7 3 min [3]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:39 ( -- ) (): Thank you very much, Senator Hodgins-May. And thank you, as the Greens spokesperson on early childhood education and care, for your support for and interest in this legislation and for your significant engagement with my office and, more broadly, with stakeholders on this really important piece of legislation.
      • This bill is incredibly important. We said that child safety was our top priority when it comes to early childhood education and care. We said we would introduce a bill in the first sitting of this parliament to make sure that we have a new power as the Commonwealth to withdraw Commonwealth childcare subsidy from those providers who don't put children first. That is exactly what we are here to do today -- to pass this legislation, to be united as one parliament to do that and to make sure that we can keep children safer in early learning. We know that the Commonwealth childcare subsidy is a big lever that we have to pull, and it is a lever that we intend to use. Our message to providers who are not doing the right thing is that we want you to lift your game. Our priority is to work with those providers and work with our state regulators to do exactly that. We're really proud of this bill. We know that it will go a long way to sending a really strong message to providers across the board that they must invest in quality and safety in early childhood education.
      • We are a strong supporter of Aboriginal community-controlled early childhood education. We know that early education is an absolute game changer for children. It is particularly a game changer for children from disadvantaged backgrounds, including First Nations backgrounds. We know, even from recent Closing the Gap data, just how much of a game changer early childhood education is in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, and we know that culturally safe early childhood education is the key to good outcomes for young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We will continue to work with and support the ACCO sector, including in relation to this bill.
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:42, page 7 / Victoria 09:42 () (): A third of National Quality Standard quality assessments are out of date, more than three years old. We have heard that this backlog will make it difficult for the government to rely on quality assessments and ultimately will reduce the effectiveness of the legislation. Minister, how will the government address this issue and ensure that national quality standard assessments are brought up to date? Will you adequately fund the state and territory governments to ensure that they properly assess quality in a timely manner?
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:42, page 7 3 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:42 ( -- ) (): This bill gives the Commonwealth the power, and gives the secretary of the department the ability, to apply sanctions to providers who are not doing a good enough job of keeping our children safe, and that includes suspending or cancelling funding for existing services that they may have if safety standards are not being met. It also includes giving the secretary the ability to ensure that any future services of those providers who are not putting children first will not be approved, so it the prevents their expansion. There's a number of criteria that the secretary will consider when making those decisions, and one of those is a criteria that you've mentioned, which is a failure to meet our National Quality Standards, particularly as it pertains to safety and quality.
      • The secretary also has the capacity to look at serious incidents and the nature and frequency of those serious incidents. Also the secretary has the capacity to look at providers' legal compliance on a range of related safety legislation, look at complaints and also look at the work with the state regulators, including conditions that they may have already imposed on early childhood providers. So there's a range of criteria that the secretary can look at when considering whether to use this powerful lever. Meanwhile, we continue to work, shoulder to shoulder, with the states and territories. We have a strong and significant package of reform that we're working through with the states and territories. We'll have more to say about that after we hold our urgent, standalone early childhood education ministers meeting in a couple of weeks.
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:45, page 8 / Victoria 09:45 () (): I don't feel any more reassured about the backlog and the significant delays on those national quality standards after that answer, but I urge you to provide more information as you get it following those consultations with states. What is the threshold in the National Quality Standard assessment that would prevent a provider from opening a new CCS-approved service if they are already operating existing centres? I'm keen to understand a bit more about the threshold.
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:45, page 8 3 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:45 ( -- ) (): The criteria are set out in the bill. I've just run through the criteria that the secretary can consider when -- in this case with the current secretary of the department -- he is considering either removing funding from providers who already have established services, or when he is considering preventing providers from opening additional services.
      • What we want to see, of course, is all providers meeting the national quality standards. Those standards don't need to be specified in this bill because they already exist and they stand outside of the bill in the National Quality Framework. We want to see providers meet the National Quality Standard. It's really important, in this bill, that we avoid being too prescriptive about the exact thresholds at which sanctions apply. The secretary is looking at a range of measures, including the national quality standards and how providers are going at meeting those standards. They're also looking at serious incidents. They're looking at other legal compliance with other state laws. They're looking at complaints. They're looking at conditions that may have been provided. They're also -- and this is clear in the legislation -- looking at whether any significant efforts have been made to improve compliance and improve safety. So it's important that the secretary has some flexibility, and, of course, in the meantime we expect every provider to meet the national quality standards.
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:48, page 8 / Victoria 09:48 () (): What framework will guide decisions about whether to publish information -- for example, why centres aren't being allowed to open a new centre or are having their subsidy blocked, or decisions along that way? Speaking to the concern from parents that this process might not be as transparent as they hoped, will parents be informed when information is withheld and why? In my home state of Victoria, we're having real issues in getting the government to release documentation about breaches that have occurred in centres. So I would like to provide some assurance to parents.
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:48, page 8 / Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:48 ( -- ) (): I think the first assurance that we should provide parents is that the vast majority of our early childhood education and care providers do meet and exceed our national quality standards, but there is a small group of providers who persistently and consistently breach those standards. Where we have significant concerns, transparency for parents is really important, and it is provided for in the bill. We have greater publication powers with this bill than we've had before. The secretary is able to publish on our enforcement action register when CCS approval is being dealt with under this legislation. The secretary will also have a wider range of powers to publicise the broader range of compliance actions that are being taken in relation to CCS. 2 min
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:50, page 8 / Victoria 09:50 () (): To understand that a little more clearly, what framework will guide whether they decide to list those events or those actions?
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:50, page 8 2 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:50 ( -- ) (): Importantly, the bill gives the secretary powers that they haven't had before to make actions taken under the legislation public. The disposition will be to publish. We think parents have a right to know about compliance action in relation to the services that their children are in. There is also a broader body of work in relation to that transparency going on with the education minister's process that we've been talking about.
      • Of course, we need to manage parents' understanding of what's going on in their services and make sure that they're confident. If publication would cause any harm to a service, and, really, to the families in that service, then that needs to be taken into consideration. It's probably also important to note that, if there's any imminent risk to children in an early learning service, the state regulators have the power to close those services down, and they can and do use those powers.
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:52, page 8 / Victoria 09:52 () (): Thank you, Minister. It sounds like at the moment there aren't clear guidelines but it's at the discretion of the secretary to decide, but I'm hearing that they'll err on the side of disclosure. Is that accurate?
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:52, page 8 / Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:52 ( -- ) (): Yes.
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:52, page 8 / Victoria 09:52 () (): I circle back to my previous question in relation to the threshold in the National Quality Standard assessments that would prevent a provider from opening a new centre if they're already operating centres. Is there some sort of standard by which you're looking at it? If half of the centres, for example, aren't meeting national quality standards, or 90 per cent of services aren't -- can you provide any more detail on what that standard will look like and what is being considered in the decision to permit a new centre to open or not? 1 min
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:53, page 9 / Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:53 ( -- ) (): I refer you to my previous answer, in the sense that the secretary has the capacity to look at a number of criteria at once, and it's important to do that. For example, if a service is not meeting a quality and safety standard in the National Quality Framework but is making significant efforts at improvement, that needs to be taken into account. The criteria that will be used by the secretary are provided for in the bill.
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:53, page 9 / Victoria 09:53 () (): Minister, how will the requirements under this legislation be applied, if at all, to centres that don't come under the National Quality Standard? 1 min
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:54, page 9 / Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:54 ( -- ) (): The bill covers providers that receive the Commonwealth childcare subsidy. I think you're referring to another dreadful case that came to light, where there are a small number of providers outside the National Quality Framework. If they're in receipt of the Commonwealth childcare subsidy, the bill applies to them.
    • Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 09:54, page 9 / Victoria 09:54 () (): Minister, what consideration has been given to the impact on the early childhood education workforce incentive with the new requirements? 1 min
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 09:55, page 9 2 min [3]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:55 ( -- ) (): This bill is incredibly important. We know that there have been really distressing allegations of abuse in our early learning services. Every child needs to be safe, and every parent needs to have confidence that they are. This bill will go a long way to ensuring that, and it's really important that we have this lever -- that we're able to withdraw Commonwealth funding from those providers who are not putting child safety first.
      • I think you know, Senator Hodgins-May, that you don't have to tell me how incredibly important the workforce is in keeping children safe and providing quality early education because I proudly represented the early childhood educators in their union before coming to parliament. One of the really significant things that we've done to invest in quality and safety outside of this particular legislation is invest $3.6 billion in a really long overdue pay rise for our early childhood educators. That is absolutely critical to quality and safety, because what it's done is help deal with the workforce crisis that had existed over the previous decade when there was a very high turnover of early childhood educators. We know that the safest and best-quality services are services that have long-term, stable, committed, dedicated early childhood educators who know the children, the families and each other and who are committed to a child-safe culture.
      • Since we started to implement the pay rise, we've had a reduction in job vacancies being advertised by 26 per cent, which is huge and was unheard of over the last several years. That's happened at the same time as we've grown the workforce. So it's a really significant stabilisation of the workforce. It's a stabilisation that respects them, values them and invests in them and their ability to have a child-safe culture and provide that security to children and families.
    • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 09:57, page 9 [5]
      • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 09:57 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That the committee report progress and ask leave to sit again.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Progress reported.
      • Ordered that the committee have leave to sit again at a later hour.
• Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt By 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025 26 min [3]
  • In Committee 14 min [2]
    • Faruqi, Sen Mehreen, New South Wales, AG, 10:00, page 9 1 min [17]
      • New South Wales Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens 10:00 ( -- ) (): I move Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3369:
      • (1) Page 33 (after line 22), at the end of the Bill, add:
      • Schedule 4 -- Maximum student contribution amounts for places
      • Part 1 -- Amendments
      • Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • 1 Section 93-10
      • maximum student contribution amount for a place maximum student contribution amount for a place Omit "The ", substitute "(1) Subject to subsection (2), the ".
      • 2 At the end of section 93-10
      • Add:
      • Higher Education Support Amendment (Job Ready Graduates and Supporting Regional and Remote Students) Act 2020 (2) The table in subsection (1) has effect in relation to a place in a unit of study included in the Society and Culture part of the *first funding cluster as if the amount specified for that part of the cluster in respect of both a non-grandfathered student and a grandfathered student was instead the amount specified for that place in the unit of study immediately before the amendments made by Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the commenced.
      • Part 2 -- Application provision
      • 3 Application
      • The amendments made by Part 1 of this Schedule apply in relation to a unit of study that has a *census date that is on or after the commencement of that Part (whether the unit of study is part of a course of study commenced before, on or after the commencement of that Part).
      • This amendment reverses the Job-ready Graduates fee hikes. The Albanese government talks a big game about their cost-of-living credentials, but the reality is that, under their watch, fees for degrees have skyrocketed, with students now paying in excess of $50,000 for an arts degree.
      • When the Morrison government introduced their disastrous, punitive, Job-ready Graduates Package, Labor was strong in opposition, but they have now had over three years in power and have done nothing about it. Even their own Universities Accord process found that the fee hikes required urgent remediation. Just this week, over a hundred well-known Australians signed an open letter urging the Albanese government to abolish Job-ready Graduates and implement a system that does not punish students who choose to study humanities and social sciences.
      • So Labor crowing about their one-off debt cut does nothing for the students who are starting university this year and facing ballooning fees. It also does nothing for the high-school graduates that are deciding not to go to university because they can't afford to. If the government was serious about relief for students, the Job-ready Graduate fee hikes would have been reversed back in 2022, but, unfortunately, this was not the case.
      • Labor still has an opportunity to support this amendment and make $50,000 arts degrees a thing of the past. So I commend the amendment to the Senate and urge others to support it, because we need to urgently repeal this punitive package.
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 10:01, page 10 [8]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:01 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Faruqi for her amendment. The government is not in a position to support this amendment at this time.
      • The government is currently responding to a range of recommendations from the Universities Accord. We have implemented or are in the process of implementing 31 of the 47 recommendations of the accord in full or in part. This includes making the indexation of HELP debts fairer, cost-of-living relief for students, support for people from the outer suburbs and regions to go to university, and structural reforms to our tertiary education system.
      • Last year the government wiped $3 billion of HELP debt for three million Australians and fixed indexation on HELP debt so that it will never increase faster than wages. For an individual with an average HELP debt of $26,500, around $1,200 has been wiped from their outstanding student loan.
      • Commonwealth prac payments started on 1 July 2025 for the first time. These will support about 68,000 eligible teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students while they are completing their compulsory practical training at university.
      • From 1 January 2025, the government massively expanded fee-free uni-ready courses to help more students from disadvantaged backgrounds get a chance to access university. We've also established the interim Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, from 1 July 2025. The Minister for Education has said we'll keep working through the accord's recommendations and we'll take advice from the Australian Tertiary Education Commission.
      • This bill cuts student debt by 20 per cent and delivers important structural reforms to repayments, which will benefit generations to come. This is the commitment the Australian people supported at the last election.
      • ( Senator Chandler ): The question before the chair is that Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3369, moved by Senator Faruqi, be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Chandler, Sen Claire (The TEMPORARY CHAIR), Tasmania, LP, page 10
  • Adoption Of Report / Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 10:14, page 11 7 min [4]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:14 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That the report from the committee be adopted.
    • I note that former senator Janet Rice is in the chamber -- welcome back! The question is that the report from the committee be adopted.
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 11
  • Third Reading 4 min [2]
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 10:21, page 12 4 min [4]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:21 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That the bill be now read a third time.
      • The question is that the motion moved by the minister be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 12
    • Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, South Australia, AG, 10:25, page 12 [3]
      • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 10:25 ( -- ) (): President, I'd just like to draw attention to the state of the opposition benches for the last 15 minutes. They seem to have been invisible, missing, on the important issue of student debt --
      • Senator Hanson-Young, this is not a time for a statement. It's not appropriate for a quorum because there are senators in here. The practice in this place is that we don't comment on whether senators are in the chamber or not, and I expect all senators to respect that.
      • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 12
• Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 13 min [4]
  • Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
  • First Reading / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 10:26, page 12 1 min [4]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 10:26 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Bills read a first time.
  • Second Reading 11 min [4]
    • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 10:27, page 12 [25]
      • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 10:27 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That these bills be now read a second time.
      • Hansard I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in .
      • Leave granted.
      • The speeches read as follows --
      • CUSTOMS AMENDMENT (AUSTRALIA-UNITED ARAB EMIRATES COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION) BILL 2025
      • Customs Act 1901 The Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 amends the to implement the Free Trade Agreement known as the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between Australia and the United Arab Emirates.
      • The Agreement will bring both commercial and strategic benefits. The UAE is Australia's largest trade and investment partner in the Middle East. In 2024, total trade between UAE and Australia was worth $12.3 billion. UAE investment into Australia rose to $14.7 billion in 2024 while our investment in the UAE rose to $9.0 billion resulting in two-way trade of $23.7 billion.
      • The Agreement will give a competitive advantage to Australian exporters by eliminating tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian exports, by value; to the UAE.
      • It is estimated that this will result in tariff savings of up to $135 million on Australian goods exported to the UAE in the first year, rising to $160 million as tariffs are progressively eliminated over five years.
      • The Agreement locks in access to services markets, and provides a framework to facilitate investment to support Australia's energy transition and Future Made in Australia ambitions. It will also improve certainty for exporters and importers, service suppliers and investors across the whole economy.
      • The Agreement will support a strong and diversified economy that will enhance the resilience of Australia's trade and investment to future crises. It will also enhance Australia's economic engagement with the UAE through strengthened trade rules that will help build upon our already healthy trading relationship.
      • The amendments contained in this Bill will establish, in the Customs Act, the rules of origin and document retention requirements called for by the Agreement. Those amendments determine when imported goods from the United Arab Emirates in accordance with the Agreement may be considered to have originating status, called UAE originating goods, and be eligible for preferential rates of customs duty.
      • Tariff Act 1995 Complementary amendments to the Customs are also required to provide for these preferential rates of customs duty applicable to UAE originating goods.
      • The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties reviewed both the Agreement and related supplementary Investment Agreement, and recommended that they be ratified.
      • I commend this Bill to the Chamber.
      • CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (AUSTRALIA-UNITED ARAB EMIRATES COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION) BILL 2025
      • Customs Tariff Act 1995 The Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 will amend the to implement the preferential rates of customs duty for UAE Originating Goods to implement the Free Trade Agreement known as the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between Australia and the United Arab Emirates.
      • These amendments, together with the amendments by the Customs Amendment (Australia United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, will ensure that Australia fulfils its obligations as a signatory to the Agreement and is prepared for the Agreement to enter into force for Australia.
      • This Bill will insert a new Schedule of duty rates into the Customs Tariff Act. Schedule 16 will contain the preferential rates of customs duty for imported goods that satisfy the rules of origin set out in the Agreement. UAE Originating Goods not set out in Schedule 16 will have a 'Free' rate of duty.
      • Australia has committed to reducing the rate of customs duty on most UAE Originating Goods to 'Free', either at entry into force or over several years following entry into force of the Agreement.
      • Excise-equivalent goods -- which are certain fuel, alcohol, tobacco and petroleum products -- that are UAE Originating Goods will continue to have excise equivalent duties of customs applied, so they receive the same treatment as domestically produced equivalents.
      • Finally, this Bill also amends certain tariff concessions to maintain their scope and ensure that commitments made under the Agreement are honoured.
      • The amendments in this Bill complement the amendments in the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025.
      • I commend this Bill to the Chamber.
    • Duniam, Sen Jonathon, Tasmania, LP, 10:27, page 13 4 min [6]
      • Tasmania Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 10:27 ( -- ) (): On behalf of the opposition, I'll make a contribution to these bills, the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 and Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025. It was the former coalition government who initiated the Australia-UAE agreement via announcement with the UAE in March of 2022.
      • When the former coalition agreement was elected in 2013, our goods and services covered by a free trade agreement were at 25 per cent, and by 2022 it had gone to 80 per cent, including the agreements with the UK and India. The former coalition government ratified the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the world's largest free trade agreement, and signed FTAs with Korea, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Peru and Indonesia, as well as regional agreements across the Indo-Pacific, including the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations, PACER, and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
      • Live sheep are a key commodity for the UAE, who import for religious, cultural and social reasons. This deal with the UAE could have supported the industry for years to come. Instead, those opposite have turned their backs on our farmers and left them out in the cold by ending the live sheep trade domestically.
      • Of course, there are some benefits to this agreement. The agreement is Australia's first free trade agreement with a nation of the Middle East. The UAE is Australia's largest trade and investment partner in the Middle East. Australian exporters will benefit from the elimination of tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exports to the UAE by value. Once fully implemented, it is estimated to increase Australian exports by around $678 million per annum. When fully implemented, CEPA will eliminate tariffs over 99 per cent of Australia's exports to the UAE by value, with most tariffs eliminated on entry into force or locked in at zero, and others eliminated over three or five stages.
      • Removal of the UAE's import tariffs will create commercially significant benefits for Australian exporters, which opens opportunities for Australian exporters to diversify into this important Middle East market and provides greater certainty on the tariff treatment they will receive. CEPA will also benefit exporters of products such as automotive parts, gold, nickel, coal and diamonds. Farmers and food and beverage producers stand to gain from our preferential access to the UAE's growing market for premium food and agricultural products with the elimination of tariffs on products such as frozen beef, sheepmeat, canola seeds, dry legumes and dairy.
      • With $9.43 billion in two-way goods and services trade in 2023 -- over $10 billion, of course, in the pre-COVID era -- the UAE is Australia's 21st-largest trading partner globally. Goods and services exports to the UAE were worth $5.2 billion in 2023 and were dominated by alumina, meat and oil seeds. Australian goods and services imports from the UAE were worth $4.7 billion in 2023 and mainly consisted of petroleum products and urea. Australian exporters will benefit from the elimination of tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exports to the UAE, by value. Once fully implemented, it's estimated to increase Australian exports by around $678 million per year.
    • Bragg, Sen Andrew, New South Wales, LP, 10:31, page 14 4 min [5]
      • New South Wales 10:31 () (): I want to put on record how important it is for pieces of legislation like these, the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 and Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, to pass this parliament. We are a trading nation, and there will be much commentary over the coming months and years as countries like Australia respond to the United States' new tariff policy. Historically, it's not unusual for the United States to adopt a form of protectionism, nor is it unusual for Europeans and others to adopt a form of protectionism. But there are a couple of important lessons for Australia which must be mainstays of our trade policy going forward.
      • I note that the opposition's trade spokesman, Kevin Hogan, has been doing a great job here in presenting a very cogent analysis as we have been responding to the United States' tariff policies, which you would have to say are quite volatile policies at the best of times. One of those lessons is that the subsidisation of industry should be avoided at all costs. The nation went through a very difficult period in the eighties and nineties, when the Hawke government did the right thing and started to bring down the tariff wall and ended the policy of industry subsidisation. That is an important lesson for today, because initiatives to subsidise industry where government is picking winners -- as we have seen from this Future Made in Australia policy -- are destined to fail. It's throwing money -- taxpayers' funds -- at businesses and, frankly, misses the point of the role of government. The role of government is to ensure that a country can be competitive and can then concentrate on its comparative advantages. We need to have some sophistication as we respond to these huge policy ructions from the United States, and the subsidisation of industry must be avoided at all costs.
      • The other thing we must do -- and this has been put on record by Mr Hogan -- is find more avenues to diversify our trade. We will always be a trading nation and we have a relatively small domestic population, which relies on trade very heavily. In fact, any attempt to try and compare the economic positions of the United States and Australia really does miss this key point, I've noticed. The United States is a very large domestic market, sure, but it's also a trading nation. But it can get away with a lot of crazy ideas which we would be killed by. So we have to show fidelity to free trade. We must, as these bills propose to do, find ways to liberalise and open up new markets. We should always look to eliminate barriers to trade beyond the border and we must, at all costs, avoid the subsidisation of industry.
      • This is a disastrous policy, and, for a government that is a Labor government, it needs to go back and look very carefully at the policies of the Hawke government, which were the reverse of a lot of this government's industry subsidisation policies we see today. Mr Chalmers is a great devotee of the Hawke government. I think he's done some sort of doctoral thesis on the Hawke government. He might need to dig up this thesis. If he does so, he will find that the Hawke government eliminated the subsidisation of industry and brought down the tariff war, which is the reverse of what the Future Made in Australia policies will be doing in part.
      • I am very conscious that a lot of false comparisons between Australia and America are made in the public domain. Of course, we are culturally very alike, and America is one of our most important friends, but we are fundamentally different economies, and we cannot entertain any form of protectionism, nor should we ever entertain any form of industry subsidisation as we have seen canvassed in these past few months.
    • Green, Sen Nita, Queensland, ALP, 10:35, page 15 [6]
      • Queensland Assistant Minister for Tourism, Assistant Minister for Pacific Island Affairs and Assistant Minister for Northern Australia 10:35 ( -- ) (): I also rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025. The government is committed to seeking the entry into force of the Australia-UAE Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement as soon as possible to enable the realisation of its many benefits.
      • The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties of the previous parliament scrutinised this trade agreement and recommended that binding treaty action be taken to implement the agreement. I wish to express my sincere thanks to all members of the committee, of which I was one, but, most importantly, special thanks go to the former and current chair, Ms Lisa Chesters MP. There was an enormous amount of work involved in progressing that report as quickly as possible so that we could be in the position to consider that bill today.
      • This trade agreement includes ambitious outcomes to benefit both Australia and the UAE. These include eliminating tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exported to the UAE, valued at $160 million when fully implemented; valuable First Nations outcomes covering trade and investment; and acknowledging the importance of women's economic empowerment, as well as the importance of the environment and the transition to net zero. The UAE is Australia's largest trade and investment partner in the Middle East, with total trade between the UAE and Australia worth $12.3 billion in 2024. This trade agreement will give Australian exporters to the UAE a significant commercial edge over other international competitors.
      • Finally, the government's approach to trade recognises that Australia's economic resilience depends on open global trade relations underpinned by robust rules. 'More trade, not less' is a key part of how we will build the economic future we want in Australia, with secure, high-paying jobs and an open, internationally competitive economy powered by clean energy. This trade agreement with the UAE will assist Australia to reach its full economic potential. I'd like to thank my fellow members for supporting the legislation that will ratify this important trade agreement, and I'd like to put on record my thanks to the minister and his team for their very hard work in negotiating, achieving and, hopefully today, ratifying this important trade agreement.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Bills read a second time.
  • Third Reading 1 min [2]
    • O'Sullivan, Sen Matt (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP, 10:38, page 15 / ( Senator O'Sullivan ) 10:38 (): No amendments have been circulated. Does any senator require a Committee of the Whole stage? There being none, I call the minister to move the third reading. 1 min
    • Green, Sen Nita, Queensland, ALP, 10:39, page 15 [4]
      • Queensland Assistant Minister for Tourism, Assistant Minister for Pacific Island Affairs and Assistant Minister for Northern Australia 10:39 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That these bills be now read a third time.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Bills read a third time.
• Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025 33 min [3]
  • Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025
  • Second Reading 31 min [3]
    • Dowling, Sen Richard, Tasmania, ALP, 10:39, page 16 9 min [16]
      • Tasmania 10:39 () (): I note this is not my first speech. No student should be forced to choose between their education and their safety. For years now, the evidence has been clear and deeply troubling with respect to gender based violence in higher education communities, and specifically I refer to sexual assault and harassment. In earlier stages of this debate we heard a lot about statistics and figures, but I will repeat one of them from the National Student Safety Survey of 2021: one in 20 students reported sexual assault. Of these, only five per cent made a formal complaint. What does that mean? It means that, in a cohort of a thousand students, 50 have been assaulted, yet fewer than three of those assaults were formally reported. These are distressing figures. Just think about it: in any lecture theatre across the country, about five out of every hundred students in the room have experienced sexual assault since starting university. These figures are, of course, worse for females and even worse for students that identify as gender diverse and for students with a disability. Sadly, most have been left to carry that burden in silence, without knowing how to get the support they need and deserve. Starting university is supposed to be one of the most exciting periods of your life; it turns into one of the most terrifying.
      • Violence impacts a victim-survivor's mental and physical health and wellbeing. It can and does also negatively affect students' educational outcomes. They may be less able to attend or participate in classes, and in some cases they will withdraw from their studies altogether. I note the STOP Campaign submission to the Universities Accord panel, which found:
      • Multiple respondents detailed that they now live with mental health impacts, such as PTSD, anxiety, depression, suicide attempts, disordered eating and panic attacks as a result of their experiences. Many respondents also noted they were unable to go to class or attend campus in general due to fear of running into their perpetrator. Some were also forced to continue living in the same accommodation as their perpetrator, constantly living in a state of fear. Socially, victim-survivors often chose to not engage in social events as they felt unsafe. Some respondents also noted the destruction of past relationships and difficulty creating new relationships as a result of their experience of violence and harm.
      • That is a pretty disturbing submission from the STOP Campaign. Staff are also victims of gender based violence, and it can obviously result in reduced performance, absenteeism and more turnover of staff. These impacts directly challenge the core mission of universities and the education they provide.
      • It's our responsibility in this place to ensure proper governance, transparent reporting and accountability, to make sure that harm is prevented and that, when harm does occur, it is properly responded to -- that is, a response that ensures people are heard and have access to the trauma informed support they need to order to successfully achieve their educational outcomes. That's precisely what the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 and the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025 set out to do. These bills are a key outcome of the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education, which all education ministers across the federation signed up to. Once passed, these bills will hold higher education providers to consistently high standards to proactively prevent and respond to gender based violence.
      • The Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 introduces a National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence. It will ensure our universities and other higher education providers put safety first. It strengthens prevention, improves responses when harm happens and holds providers accountable for how they perform, right down to student accommodation. The Minister for Education will be able to set a national code that lays down best practice standards, and every provider will need to meet those standards.
      • To monitor and enforce the code, a new specialist gender based violence unit will be established within the Department of Education. Vice-chancellors and CEOs will be directly responsible for making sure their institutions comply, and they'll have to report every six months to their governing bodies. Compliance won't be a tick-and-flick exercise. It will require regular reporting on incident data and steps being taken to prevent and respond to gender based violence.
      • Let us recall that the 2017 Human Rights Commission recommended that every university establish advisory committees to address sexual violence. That recommendation was in 2017. Yet, as reporting by the ABC in February last year showed, a third of universities still did not have such committees. And too many fall short on transparency. This bill brings the transparency and oversight necessary -- regular annual reporting through the minister and to parliament -- and enhances accountability. By driving whole-of-institution cultural and regulatory reform in the higher education system, with over 1.5 million students and 130,000 staff, the bill will also help lead social change.
      • Another measure from the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education is the introduction of the National Student Ombudsman, who commenced in February this year. The Student Ombudsman enables higher education students to escalate complaints about the actions of their higher education provider, including gender based violence complaints. What I'm most pleased about with this bill is that the code will also include an enforceable requirement that providers implement the recommendations of the National Student Ombudsman. As Minister Clare noted in the other place, this gives the findings and recommendations of the ombudsman real teeth and will make sure they are put in place to improve our universities and other providers.
      • I will finish with some STOP Campaign submission quotes. Again, these are direct quotes from students. They are quite distressing, but I think it's really important to record why we are having this discussion now. The first quote is from a young student who said:
      • I experienced assault as a young adolescent. I was so excited to leave my home town and attend university, live on campus and make friends. It was one of the worst experiences of my life ... The culture on campus is indisputably unsafe and toxic.
      • It's pretty damning. Secondly, another student said:
      • I withdrew socially after I was assaulted, and struggled to scrape through my final year of university. I ended up deferring my Honours and not going back to university ... because I couldn't deal with walking around places where I knew I might see my perpetrators, or be reminded of them.
      • And finally, another said: 'I had panic attacks before class because I knew the perpetrator was in the class with me.' These are statements directly from students. That's why we're here debating this bill now, and it's more than overdue. The students should never have had these experiences. Horrifically, they did. It's incredibly brave that they did speak up. Because of their bravery, we can now take action. I'd like to read a final quote from the campaign submission which simply states:
      • Please listen to the voices of students and survivors as these are the opinions that matter.
      • For too long, students have been let down by their universities and by inaction by previous governments. That changes today. Students should be able to learn at universities and live on campus free from harassment or assault. We should do everything we can to reduce harm experienced within university settings. Let's be clear: passing this bill is not the end of the work. It's the foundation. No student should be forced to choose between their education and their safety. It's that simple.
    • Ananda-Rajah, Sen Michelle, Victoria, ALP, 10:48, page 17 12 min [13]
      • Victoria 10:48 () (): I wish I was not having to speak on this issue. I long for the day when we, as a parliament -- indeed, as a community -- do not know the meaning of gender based violence because it's no longer part of our lexicon. But, sadly, that is not the case. That is not the world we live in, even in 2025. Students and staff in any workplace need to feel safe. That is especially so in our educational spaces -- in our schools, as well as in our higher education settings. For too long, this problem of gender based violence has really been swept under the carpet.
      • There has been a testimonial injustice dealt out to the many students who have raised concerns, over at least a decade, with the powers that be in our universities. We all know, but take for granted, that safety is a prerequisite to participation -- in any setting, whether it be work or study, or in training centres, sporting teams and so on. But if you do believe, as I do, that education is the most powerful lever we have to climb up that ladder of social mobility, then not addressing gender based violence or any other type of barrier to participation is a denial of this country's wealth. It's denying our country the kind of wealth that it should realise because it holds people back. It holds people back and it results in worse social and educational outcomes ultimately.
      • We know the statistics around gender based violence -- something like one in 12 students in the past 12 months have experienced sexual harassment and one in six since starting university. That's very common. That's highly common. With regards to sexual assault, most extreme type of violence, it is one in 90 in the last 12 months and one in 20 since starting university.
      • These are almost certainly going to be underreported compared to the reality because most people do not disclose these types of events because the response, frankly, from the universities has been pretty poor. It's been completely substandard. We also know that, in terms of formal complaints made to the university, one in 30 students who were sexually harassed made a formal complaint. That's only three per cent. There is gross underreporting, and it is the same with sexual assault -- only 5.6 per cent have reported and made formal complaints to the university. The question must be asked as to why that is so.
      • In terms of the most prevalent settings within a higher education context, these incidents tend to occur in clubs and societies followed by student accommodation -- student accommodation, where people basically try and find sanctuary after a busy day at university or in class, wouldn't have been on my radar -- and, of course, then in private homes and residences. It is simply not good enough.
      • But the statistics belie the real burden, and that's only conveyed through qualitative data. I'll read out a few quotes here. This is from a student who experienced unsolicited sexual advances -- common; I certainly experienced it when I was a junior doctor -- 'Despite clearly mentioning that I was not interested, my colleague approached me. It was an invasion of personal space, and we were in my room preparing for an exam. He tried to kiss me, and I pulled back in shock. He said, "But you were talking so openly about wanting romantic and sexual freedom."' In what universe is that even acceptable? Apparently, this is the norm in our universities.
      • Then there are, of course, the catcalls. Is there any woman or girl around who has not ever been subjected to catcalls -- yelling, whistling, honking of cars and, worst case, stalking, which we know is even more prevalent now thanks to our online virtual worlds. This from a student: 'I was at college event at the bar ordering drinks, and this guy came up to me clearly drunk. He tried to look under my dress. I felt very self-conscious and walked away as fast as I could.' There are many women, girls and young women out there who have experienced this, and we all know what that feels like. You tend to freeze. You are so self-conscious and threatened that you revert to your primal response, which is fight or flight, and if it's flight, it's a sense of paralysis.
      • Then of course there are the invasive questions, the inappropriate language and the inappropriate jokes. 'Going to university, I dealt with men stalking me online, following my class timetable at uni to know where I was, and I tried to avoid them.' There was one quote that particularly jumped out at me from a student who used the bus at night-time to get about university. As you know, universities instituted these transport services at night in order to actually help students, particularly women, feel safe. But this is what one student disclosed: 'I was asked extremely private, personal and uncomfortable questions about my sex life by a uni bus driver when he used to drive me around the campus late at night.' You're essentially a captive audience in that kind of setting. It's just awful to read.
      • We also know that there are certain faculties and subjects at university which are male-dominated, and these areas are fraught, particularly for women students. These domains of study desperately need more gender balance in order to drive the kind of cultural change that is essential at university level. But this is what women encounter: 'I am a young woman who has studied in a massively male-dominated field. I often face comments from fellow students and lecturers about my physical appearance, ranging from unnecessary compliments to sexual and degrading comments. At times, when I have rejected the romantic advances from other students, I have been threatened to have my name slandered, which has the potential to greatly harm my academic career. I have also had men engage in intimidating behaviours after my rejection of them. I constantly fear being too nice.' That is the experience of millions of Australian women currently, as well as that of women in the past, and it's really as a nod to them that we are bringing forward this legislation.
      • As you know, Acting Deputy President O'Sullivan, in February of this year the National Student Ombudsman opened its doors for the first time. This is essentially a watchdog for the university sector. It is a watchdog with teeth. It has all the powers of a royal commission. It's designed to hold universities to account and increase transparency. It also has an educative role. So, if students are not getting the kinds of results that they need to get from universities, they can escalate to the ombudsman on all kinds of matters: discrimination, racism, Islamophobia, antisemitism, gender based violence -- you name it. But that's not enough; we have to go further, and that is why we've introduced this legislation.
      • This legislation will essentially bring forward a more robust framework to address gender based violence in universities, and it builds upon the ombudsman work. It essentially puts the onus on higher education providers to introduce preventive strategies, and it will have a much stronger compliance function with penalties attached. It imposes a positive duty on universities to lift their game. It will have a national code which will set best practice standards, which will be informed by the experts, and it will attempt to address the drivers that lead to this kind of behaviour. It will certainly prioritise prevention. It will hold the boards and the chairs, who are the vice-chancellors, the CEOs, of universities to account, and I think that's really important. If you really want to drive cultural change, you have to start at the top -- you have to hold the top dogs accountable -- and this is what this legislation will do. It will have an educative function and it will be transparent. It will report to the parliament. There will be regular reporting of incident data in these institutions.
      • The legislation will also -- and I think this is important -- establish a specialised unit, focused on gender based violence, in the Department of Education. Again, this unit will be designed to educate but also to enforce, and there will be public reporting, not only in this parliament -- I hope to see it on a website, for example, which will be accessible to all Australians, because there's nothing like shining a spotlight on poor behaviour. So it will have a naming and shaming function.
      • I will conclude by saying that this has been a long time coming, and I pay tribute to the many, many activists and advocates over a long period of time -- some, over 10 years -- who have worked towards this outcome. It is through your advocacy, your voices, your hard work, blood, sweat and tears, that we have delivered this. I'm proud that it has been a Labor government -- which, by the way, is female dominant, 56 per cent women, with cabinet agenda parity -- that has listened and is now taking substantive action to address this problem. But, as with all types of cultural problems, it takes time. It's not just frameworks, legislative bodies, agencies and watchdogs that do it. It takes a whole-of-society effort to expunge this kind of behaviour.
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 11:00, page 19 [7]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:00 ( -- ) (): These bills provide for the establishment and enforcement of a national higher education code to prevent and respond to gender based violence. They are an important step in making students and staff safer on our campuses. I thank senators across the chamber for their contributions to this debate.
      • I note the second reading amendment from Senator Duniam. The government takes the issue of antisemitism at universities very seriously. Antisemitism, Islamophobia or any other form of racism, harassment, discrimination or intimidation must not be allowed to threaten the safety of students and staff on Australian university campuses or anywhere else. The Minister for Education has been clear that universities must enforce their codes of conduct and meet their legislative obligations, which include having policies around freedom of speech, fostering a safe environment and ensuring student and staff wellbeing.
      • Since 1 February this year, the independent National Student Ombudsman has been open for students. The ombudsman is a national first. It is available to handle complaints from students about experiences of antisemitism on university campuses. The ombudsman is required to report to government at the end of each financial year about the nature and number of complaints it has received.
      • The government is also anticipating the final report from the Race Discrimination Commissioner into racism, including antisemitism, at Australian universities. We have also received the Special Envoy's Plan to Combat Antisemitism from Ms Jillian Segal and will soon receive a report from the Special Envoy to Combat Islamophobia in Australia, Aftab Malik. The government will consider these reports carefully and respond accordingly. We want these independent bodies to have a chance to do their work rather than pre-empt any recommendations they might make. The government will not be supporting the second reading amendment as proposed at this time.
      • We are taking this action now as it forms a key commitment under the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education, following more than a decade of dedicated advocacy on behalf of victims-survivors of sexual assault and sexual harassment on campus. I commend these bills to the chamber.
      • The question is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Duniam be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 19
  • Third Reading 1 min [2]
    • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 11:10, page 20 / 11:10 (): No amendments have been circulated. Does any senator require a committee stage? If not, I shall call the minister to move the third reading. 1 min
    • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 11:11, page 20 [4]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:11 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That these bills be now read a third time.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Bills read a third time.
• Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025 [2]
  • In Committee [3]
    • Consideration resumed.
    • Bill agreed to.
    • Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.
  • Third Reading / Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 11:12, page 20 [4]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:12 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That this bill be now read a third time.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Bill read a third time.

• Senator Whitten to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Minister for the Environment and Water, by no later than Friday 29 August 2025, the referral decision brief for Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation matter 2025/10161 -- Marine survey of the Bunbury continental shelf.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Prime Minister, by no later than 9.30 am on Wednesday, 27 August 2025:
• (a) any report or analysis or assessment undertaken by the Office of National Intelligence on the risk that climate change poses to Australia's national security in the period 21 May 2022 to 30 July 2025; and
• (b) papers and briefs prepared by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet in relation to any such report.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2024:
• (a) all documents, emails/internal correspondence, internal memoranda, meeting minutes and other records of interaction from 1 April to 31 October 2024 relating to the creation, development, approval or implementation of new budgets allocated to ANU colleges (College of Arts and Social Sciences (CASS), College of Asia and the Pacific (CAP), College of Business and Economics (CBE), College of Engineering and Computer Science (CECS), College of Law (CoL) and College of Health and Medicine (CoHM), College of Science (CoS)) midway through 2024;
• (b) all budget documents, financial statements, budget allocations, budget revisions, internal reports and associated documentation for each ANU college (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS), specifically relating to how each college addressed, managed or implemented decreases in recurrent budget allocations;
• (c) all documents, memoranda or briefing notes, emails, meeting notes, internal correspondence and records of discussions from 1 April to 31 October 2024 regarding how the ANU colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS) met new recurrent budget targets and any associated budget constraints or requirements;
• (d) all documents, memoranda, emails, meeting notes, file notes, correspondence, financial records, transfer documentation and records of decisions from 1 April to 30 October 2024 concerning how funds may have been shifted, transferred, or reallocated from recurrent budgets to other ANU account types including Q accounts, W accounts, S accounts, E accounts or any other account types from all ANU colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS);
• (e) all documents, emails/internal correspondence, meeting notes, briefing notes, papers from Council, papers from senior management group, papers from relevant committees of Council and records of discussions from 1 April to 31 October 2024 regarding discussions about the impact on core and discretionary services of the colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS) as a result of budget cuts or their ability to meet future core and discretionary services and obligations; and
• (f) all documents, emails/internal correspondence, meeting notes, briefing notes, papers from Council, papers from senior management group, papers from relevant committees of Council and records of discussions from 1 April to 30 June 2025 regarding discussions and decisions about the impact of over-expenditure of 2024 budget on the 2025 budget of the colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS).
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2025:
• (a) the complete and unredacted results of the ANU staff survey conducted in March 2023, including all college, research school and portfolio-level breakdowns, demographic analysis and detailed response data;
• (b) the complete and unredacted results of the ANU staff survey conducted in September 2024, including all college, research school and portfolio-level breakdowns, demographic analysis and detailed response data; and
• (c) all supporting documentation, analysis, and reports prepared by the ANU in relation to both surveys, including any comparative analysis between the two survey periods.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That the Senate --
• Australian National University Act 1991 (a) notes that the functions of the Australian National University (ANU) are set out in the (the Act);
• (b) notes that the ANU receives additional Commonwealth funding in the form of the National Institutes Grant for research 'supporting the development of Australia's national unity and identity, including by improving Australia's understanding of itself and the history and culture of its Indigenous peoples, its Asia-Pacific neighbours, and its place in the international community';
• (c) further notes that more than 300 staff have left the ANU since the Renew ANU process commenced and that a range of courses, programs, projects and institutions have been proposed either for significantly reduced staffing or disestablishment including the School of Music, the Humanities Research Centre, the Australian National Dictionary Centre, the Australian Dictionary of Biography and the Centre for European Studies;
• (d) notes that these changes imperil the ANU's capacity to fulfil its functions under the Act; and
• (e) resolves that the ANU shall be instructed to pause any further forced redundancies or other terminations of ongoing staff until the Education and Employment Legislation Committee concludes its inquiry into the quality of governance at Australian higher education providers and presents its report.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2025, a copy of any email correspondence sent by the Chancellor to ANU Council members relating to a purported breach of Council confidentiality as referenced in an on campus bulletin on 8 July 2025.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2024:
• (a) all documents, including but not limited to correspondence, emails, briefing notes, minutes, reports, memoranda and records of meetings or discussions, related to or that discuss the ANU budget forecasts for the period 2024-27 prepared in 2023 by the then Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and Provost including assumptions underlying the forecast, and projected revenue growth and expenditure; and
• (b) all documents, including but not limited to correspondence, emails, briefing notes, minutes, reports, memoranda and records of meetings or discussions, related to the ANU budget forecasts for the period 2024-27 prepared in 2023 by the then CFO and Provost related to the classification or reclassification from CAPEX to OPEX and vice versa and any documents or advice relating to the reasons for any reclassifications, including but not limited to advice from the Australian Tax Office, the Australian National Audit Office and the ANU auditors.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That the Senate --
• (a) notes:
• (i) the review into public sector board appointment processes was commissioned to ensure appointments to government boards were made on merit,
• (ii) that on 23 July 2025, the Senate ordered the Minister for the Public Service to produce the final report of the public sector board appointments processes, and
• (iii) the minister has refused to comply with order for the production of documents no. 10, stating that the document has been prepared for Cabinet deliberation and is therefore protected by Cabinet confidentiality;
• Odgers' Australian Senate Practice (b) rejects the claim made by the minister, and notes the guidance of that claims of Cabinet confidentiality should relate only to the deliberations of Cabinet itself and not every document that merely has a connection to Cabinet; and
• (c) orders that the report be laid on the table by the Minister for the Public Service, by no later than 10 am on 25 August 2025.
• Senator Lambie to move on 26 August 2025:
• Darwin That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, by no later than 12.15 pm on 28 August 2025, the final report of the HMAS Man Overboard Board of Inquiry LS Gurr.

• Selection Of Bills Committee / Report 13 min [5]
  • Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, 11:14, page 22 [126]
    • New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 11:14 Hansard ( -- ) (): I present the fourth report of 2025 of the Selection of Bills Committee, and I seek leave to have the report incorporated in .
    • Leave granted.
    • The report read as follows --
    • Selection of Bills Committee -- empty bureaucratic husk
    • REPORT NO. 4 OF 2025
    • 31 July 2025
    • MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
    • Senator Tony Sheldon (Government Whip, Chair) Senator Wendy Askew (Opposition Whip)
    • Senator Pauline Hanson (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip) Senator Nick McKim (Australian Greens Whip)
    • Senator Ralph Babet Senator Leah Blyth
    • Senator the Hon. Anthony Chisholm Senator Jessica Collins
    • Senator the Hon. Katy Gallagher Senator Susan McDonald Senator Fatima Payman
    • Senator David Pocock
    • Secretary: Tim Bryant 02 6277 3020
    • SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE -- empty bureaucratic husk
    • REPORT NO. 4 OF 2025
    • 1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 30 July 2025 at 7.18pm.
    • 1. The committee recommends that --
    • provisions referred immediately (a) the of the Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 and the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 be to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025 (see appendix 1 for statements of reasons for referral);
    • provisions referred immediately (b) the of the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 be to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025; and
    • provisions referred immediately (c) the of the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 be to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025 (see appendix 2 for statements of reasons for referral).
    • not 3. The committee recommends that the following bills be referred to committees:
    • Commonwealth Workplace Protection Orders Bill 2025
    • Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
    • Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
    • Great Australian Bight (World Heritage Protection) Bill 2025
    • National Health Amendment (Cheaper Medicines) Bill 2025.
    • 1. The committee deferred consideration of the following bills to its next meeting:
    • Australian Education Legislation Amendment (Prohibiting the Indoctrination of Children) Bill 2020
    • Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025
    • Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025
    • Broadcasting Services Amendment (Audio Description) Bill 2019
    • Constitution Alteration (Right to Free Speech) 2025
    • Copyright Legislation Amendment (Fair Pay for Radio Play) Bill 2023
    • Crimes Amendment (Repeal Mandatory Minimum Sentences) Bill 2025
    • Customs Legislation Amendment (Commercial Greyhound Export and Import Prohibition) Bill 2021
    • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Communications) Bill 2025
    • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair Territory Representation) Bill 2024
    • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fairer Contracts and Grants) Bill 2023
    • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Lowering the Voting Age) Bill 2023
    • Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) Bill 2022
    • Fair Work Amendment (Paid Reproductive Health Leave and Flexible Work Arrangements) Bill 2025
    • Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) Bill 2025
    • Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024
    • Interactive Gambling Amendment (Ban Gambling Ads) Bill 2024
    • Landholders' Right to Refuse (Gas and Coal) Bill 2015
    • Lobbying (Improving Government Honesty and Trust) Bill 2025
    • National Housing and Homelessness Plan Bill 2024
    • Parliamentary Joint Committee on Public Consultancy and Services Contracts Bill 2025
    • Right to Protest Bill 2025
    • Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Amendment (Frontline Emergency Service Workers) Bill 2025
    • Treasury Laws Amendment (Payments System Modernisation) Bill 2025.
    • 1. The committee considered the following bills but was unable to reach agreement:
    • Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025
    • Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025.
    • (Tony Sheldon)
    • Chair 31 July 2025
    • Appendix 1
    • SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE -- empty bureaucratic husk
    • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
    • Name of bill:
    • Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025
    • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
    • To scrutinise this legislation
    • Possible submissions or evidence from:
    • Interested parties and stakeholders
    • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
    • Community Affairs Legislation Committee
    • Possible hearing date(s):
    • August
    • Possible reporting date:
    • 21 August 2025
    • (signed)
    • Senator Wendy Askew
    • SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE -- empty bureaucratic husk
    • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
    • Name of bill:
    • Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025
    • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
    • To scrutinise this legislation
    • Possible submissions or evidence from:
    • Interested parties and stakeholders
    • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
    • Community Affairs Legislation Committee
    • Possible hearing date(s):
    • August
    • Possible reporting date:
    • 21 August 2025
    • (signed)
    • Senator Wendy Askew
    • Appendix 2
    • SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE -- empty bureaucratic husk
    • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
    • Name of bill:
    • Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
    • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
    • To scrutinise this legislation
    • Possible submissions or evidence from:
    • Interested parties and stakeholders
    • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
    • Economics Legislation Committee
    • Possible hearing date(s):
    • August
    • Possible reporting date:
    • 21 August 2025
    • (signed)
    • Senator Wendy Askew
    • SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE -- empty bureaucratic husk
    • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
    • Name of bill:
    • Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
    • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
    • to provide relevant stakeholders with an opportunity to provide feedback on the Bill.
    • Possible submissions or evidence from:
    • South Pacific and Australian banks.
    • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
    • Economics Legislation Committee
    • Possible hearing date(s):
    • hearing on the papers
    • Possible reporting date:
    • 21 August 2025
    • (signed)
    • Senator Nick McKim
    • I move:
    • That the report be adopted.
    • Continue / Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, page 25
  • Walsh, Sen Jess, Victoria, ALP, 11:14, page 25 1 min [6]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:14 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • At the end of the motion, add: "and the following bills not be referred to a committee:
    • (a) Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025;
    • (b) Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025
    • (c) Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025; and
    • (d) Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025.
  • Shoebridge, Sen David, New South Wales, AG, 11:15, page 25 12 min [21]
    • New South Wales 11:15 () (): At the request of Senator McKim, I move the following amendment to Labor's amendment in the terms circulated in the chamber:
    • Omit paragraphs (c) and (d), substitute "and:
    • (c) the provisions of the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 be referred immediately to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October 2025; and
    • (d) the provisions of the Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October 2025".
    • The amendment that we are moving provides that the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 be referred immediately to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October. We're also seeking that the Orwellian named Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025 not go to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security
    • the Labor-coalition stitch-up, but instead go to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. We'd really like to take at least one of those secret security bills out of that dark, smoke-filled room of the war parties and instead put it to a public inquiry -- particularly this bill, which is proposing to give the PJCIS even more powers for their secret review of intelligence.
    • But I really want to dwell on the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025. You can't make some stuff up in politics, but what about this? In the last parliament, we saw Labor coming up with a million reasons they couldn't do anything on public housing. They couldn't help people out on rents, they couldn't build public housing, and they kept saying it was all the Greens' fault for not supporting their crap bills. Then, in this parliament, they start with a public housing bill. Well done, Labor! You bring a public housing bill into the chamber. You push it through the lower house. And do you know what public housing they're building? They're building public housing for US troops under AUKUS. That's their public housing bill.
    • Right now, they want to build 700 public housing units over in WA -- not for Australians who haven't got a place to live and not for renters who can't afford to buy a home. They're building public housing for US troops because Uncle Donald asked them to. Surely they read this bill, didn't they? Didn't somebody in the Labor caucus say, 'Our first public housing bill in the new parliament can't be to build housing for US troops under AUKUS'? Surely someone did a reality check. But no. That's their bill. And do you know what? They can't even say how many hundreds of millions of public dollars will be used to build public housing for US troops under the bill.
    • Even the coalition were asking some questions about it. The coalition normally wave through anything to do with AUKUS. If it's anything to do with the US alliance, they'll wave it through. But even the coalition downstairs asked some little, quiet, tentative questions like: 'Please, sir, can you tell us how much money we're going to be paying to build the US troops public housing? Please, minister, you haven't explained in the bill how much this is going to cost; is it going to come from the Defence budget or some other budget?' When the coalition got no answers, they crawled back into their shell and went quiet on it. And that's so typical of this non-opposition opposition --
    • Senator Scarr?
    • A point of order on the language being used by Senator Shoebridge. Senator Shoebridge can do better than using language like 'crawl'. Yesterday, we had 'crunch' from the other side.
    • Thank you, Senator Scarr. That's quite enough on your point of order. It's not unparliamentary language, but I would suggest that all senators and Senator Shoebridge can do better.
    • Thank you, President. Maybe the problem is the 'Uncle Donald' reference. Maybe it's that the coalition and Labor are embarrassed about the fact that they're teaming up today to help the Senate ram through legislation to build public housing for US troops under AUKUS. It is a bloody disgrace.
    • Senator Shoebridge --
    • I withdraw that.
    • Thank you.
    • There are already 212 thousand US marines cycling in and out of Darwin. Are we building housing for the 212 thousand marines cycling in and out of Darwin? There are already plans to put 700 US troops into the surrounds of Garden Island, off Fremantle, with all their families. How many houses are we building for US troops in Fremantle under this bill? There's already a housing crisis over there.
    • We say to both the coalition and Labor: if you're going to do another stitch-up on AUKUS, at least have the guts to do it in public. At least have the guts to take this bill to an inquiry so we can find out how many hundreds of millions in Australian taxpayers' dollars are going towards building housing for US troops under the plan from the war parties, Labor and the coalition. AUKUS is already bleeding us dry, with billions of dollars going to Donald Trump and billions more going to Rolls-Royce in the UK. And now, in the first housing bill that Labor brings into this new parliament, they decide to put an unknown number of millions of dollars into building houses -- not for people in Australia who can't afford them, but for Labor's mates in the US and for US troops. It's a disgrace. Send it to inquiry.
    • The question is that the Greens amendment as moved by Senator Shoebridge, and standing in the name of Senator McKim, to the amendment moved by Senator Walsh be agreed to.
    • Interjection [6]
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 26
      • Scarr, Sen Paul, Queensland, LP, page 26
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 26
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 26
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 26
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 26
    • Continue [3]
      • Shoebridge, Sen David, New South Wales, AG, page 26
      • Shoebridge, Sen David, New South Wales, AG, page 26
      • Shoebridge, Sen David, New South Wales, AG, page 26
  • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 11:27, page 27 [3]
    • 11:27 (): The question now is that the amendment to the motion that the Selection of Bills Committee report be adopted, moved by Senator Walsh, be agreed to.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Original question, as amended, agreed to.
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:25
    • Ayes 13 [13]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • McKim, N. J. (Teller)
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
    • Noes 31 [31]
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Polley, H.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sheldon, A. V.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Walsh, J. C.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whiteaker, E.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Pairs 0
    • Question negatived.

• Rearrangement / Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 11:28, page 27 [3]
  • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 11:28 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That general business notice of motion No. 73 standing in the name of Senator Ruston, relating to Medicare, be considered during general business today.
  • Question agreed to.
• Leave Of Absence / Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, 11:28, page 27 [5]
  • New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 11:28 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move:
  • That leave of absence be granted to the following senators for today:
  • (a) Senator McCarthy, on account of ministerial business; and
  • (b) Senator Sterle, on account of parliamentary business.
  • Question agreed to.
• Leave Of Absence / Roberts, Sen Malcolm, Queensland, PHON, 11:28, page 27 [3]
  • Queensland 11:28 () (): by leave -- I move:
  • That leave of absence be granted to Senator Hanson for today, for personal reasons.
  • Question agreed to.

• The Clerk: Postponement notifications have been lodged in respect of the following:
• No. 34 (Senator Shoebridge), till 25 August 2025.
• Nos 62 and 63 (Senator Thorpe), till 25 August 2025.
• No. 70 (Senator Hanson-Young), till 25 August 2025.

• Rural And Regional Affairs And Transport References Committee / Reference 7 min [2]
  • Askew, Sen Wendy, Tasmania, LP, 11:30, page 27 4 min [13]
    • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 11:30 ( -- ) (): At the request of Senator Canavan, I move:
    • That the following matter be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 30 October 2025:
    • The Australian Government's decision to allow United States of America beef derived from bovines born and raised in North and Central America to be imported into Australia, with particular reference to:
    • (a) the possible impending threat of importing beef products from cattle herds in North and Central America which have been, or may be, exposed to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) or other serious cattle borne diseases;
    • (b) the processes undertaken by the Australian Government in determining biosecurity risk to consumers and industry, and the adequacy of such processes;
    • (c) the adequacy of the biosecurity import risk assessment, associated processes and advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in relation to importing beef and beef products from the United States of America (USA);
    • (d) the implication of future possible BSE and FMD outbreaks in the USA or other relevant countries on biosecurity assurances in Australia;
    • (e) the protocols that would apply to beef products imported from the USA and equivalency in standards;
    • (f) the Inspector-General of Biosecurity's review of the management and application of the import risk analysis process and recommendations;
    • (g) the possible implications of allowing imports from the USA for Australia's international and domestic reputation as the world's safest producer of beef; and
    • (h) any other related matters.
    • The question is that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1, standing in the name of Senator Canavan, be agreed to.
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 28
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:34
    • Ayes 27 [27]
      • Antic, A.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Bragg, A. J.
      • Brockman, W. E.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Chandler, C.
      • Collins, J.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Henderson, S. M.
      • Kovacic, M.
      • Liddle, K. J.
      • McDonald, S. E.
      • McLachlan, A. L.
      • O'Sullivan, M. A.
      • Paterson, J. W.
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sharma, D. N.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Noes 33 [33]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Ayres, T.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Polley, H.
      • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Whiteaker, E.
    • Pairs 6 [12]
      • Cadell, R. P.
      • McCarthy, M.
      • Cash, M. C.
      • Wong, P.
      • Hume, J.
      • Sterle, G.
      • McGrath, J. A.
      • Walsh, J. C.
      • McKenzie, B. G.
      • Farrell, D. E.
      • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
      • Chisholm, A. D.
    • Question negatived.
• Environment And Communications References Committee 10 min [3]
  • Reference 5 min [2]
    • Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, South Australia, AG, 11:37, page 28 [10]
      • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 11:37 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • (1) That the following matter be re-referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 June 2026:
      • Greenwashing, with particular reference to:
      • (a) the environmental and sustainability claims made by companies in industries including energy, vehicles, household products and appliances, food and drink packaging, cosmetics, clothing and footwear;
      • (b) the impact of misleading environmental and sustainability claims on consumers;
      • (c) domestic and international examples of regulating companies' environmental and sustainability claims;
      • (d) advertising standards in relation to environmental and sustainability claims;
      • (e) legislative options to protect consumers from greenwashing in Australia; and
      • (f) any other related matters.
      • (2) That the committee have the power to consider and use the records of the Environment and Communications References Committee appointed in the previous parliament.
    • Scarr, Sen Paul, Queensland, LP, 11:37, page 29 [6]
      • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 11:37 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
      • Leave is granted for one minute.
      • Given what happened in relation to the last motion, where Labor and the Greens combined to crunch the coalition and deprive the committee of considering a matter of great importance to the Australian people, the coalition will be taking a stand on this motion and opposing it. We believe that the dealings between the Greens and the Labor Party are compromising the running of this institution to consider matters of great concern to the Australian people, including in relation to the announcement made regarding the importation of beef from the United States, which has its source in both Canada and Mexico. So we will resist Labor and the Greens seeking to crunch the coalition, and seeking to thereby crunch the operation of this institution, and we will oppose.
      • The question is that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 3, standing in the name of Senator Hanson-Young, be agreed to.
      • Interjection [2]
        • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 29
        • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 29
      • Continue / Scarr, Sen Paul, Queensland, LP, page 29
  • Reference / Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, South Australia, AG, 11:42, page 30 1 min [6]
    • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 11:42 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • (1) That the following matters be re-referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 June 2026:
    • (a) the National Cultural Policy released on 30 January 2023; and
    • (b) any other related matters.
    • (2) That the committee have the power to consider and use the records of the Environment and Communications References Committee appointed in the previous parliament.
    • Question agreed to.
  • Reference / Babet, Sen Ralph, Victoria, UAP, 11:43, page 30 [10]
    • Victoria United Australia Party Whip 11:43 ( -- ) (): I, and also on behalf of Senator Roberts, move:
    • That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 31 October 2025:
    • The Internet Search Engine Services Online Safety Code (Class 1C and Class 2 Material), with particular reference to:
    • Online Safety Act 2021 (a) the heads of authority provided by the (the Act) for each provision of the code;
    • (b) the scope and accountability of the e-Safety Commissioner in administering the Act including the development of industry codes and standards;
    • (c) ensuring there are appropriate parliamentary oversight and scrutiny mechanisms for industry codes and standards;
    • (d) the operation of similar legislation in the United Kingdom and Europe as it relates to freedom of speech and freedom of the press; and
    • (e) any other related matters.
    • The question is that general business of the Senate notice of motion No. 5, standing in the names of Senators Babet and Roberts, be agreed to.
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 30
• Public Works Joint Committee / Reference / Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 11:47, page 31 [8]
  • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 11:47 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • Public Works Committee Act 1969 That
  • in accordance with the provisions of the, the following proposed works be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for consideration and report as expeditiously as is practicable:
  • Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts -- Proposed fit-out of new leased premises at 7 London Circuit, Canberra City.
  • Airservices Australia -- PFAS remediation of the former fire training ground at Rockhampton Airport, Queensland.
  • Airservices Australia -- Aviation rescue fire fighting services NexGen project for the end-of-life facilities upgrades -- Phase 1A (Queensland and Victoria).
  • I table statements in relation to the works.
  • Question agreed to.
• Productivity In Australia Select Committee / Appointment 3 min [3]
  • Askew, Sen Wendy, Tasmania, LP, 11:47, page 31 1 min [33]
    • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 11:47 ( -- ) (): At the request of Senator Bragg, I move:
    • (1) That a select committee
    • to be known as the Select Committee on Productivity in Australia, be established to inquire into and report on:
    • (a) the history of productivity growth in Australia in both multifactor and labour terms;
    • (b) the current position and opportunities to gain productivity growth;
    • (c) conflicts of interest and structural barriers to sustainable growth;
    • (d) the efficacy of federal competition law;
    • (e) opportunities for the states and territories to drive growth;
    • (f) the impact of regulatory tax burdens on productivity growth;
    • (g) the impact and opportunity of technology;
    • (h) priority opportunities in the market and non-market sectors for productivity growth;
    • (i) Australia's competitiveness and benchmarking against similar nations; and
    • (j) any other related matters.
    • (2) That the committee present its final report by 23 July 2027.
    • (3) That the committee consist of 6 senators, as follows:
    • (a) two nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;
    • (b) two nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate; and
    • (c) two nominated by minority party or independent senators.
    • (4) That:
    • (a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator;
    • (b) participating members may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee
    • and have all the rights of members of the committee
    • but may not vote on any questions before the committee; and
    • (c) a participating member shall be taken to be a member of a committee for the purpose of forming a quorum of the committee if a majority of members of the committee is not present.
    • (5) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that all members have not been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.
    • (6) That the committee elect as chair a member nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and, as deputy chair, a member nominated by Leader of the Government in the Senate.
    • (7) That the deputy chair shall act as chair when the chair is absent from a meeting of the committee, or the position of chair is temporarily vacant.
    • (8) That the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, may appoint another member of the committee to act as chair during the temporary absence of both the chair and deputy chair at a meeting of the committee.
    • (9) That, in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.
    • (10) That the committee, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.
    • (11) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff
    • facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President.
    • (12) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in public.
  • Roberts, Sen Malcolm, Queensland, PHON, 11:48, page 32 2 min [7]
    • Queensland 11:48 () (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
    • Leave is granted for one minute.
    • It's an unfortunate irony that an inquiry into productivity is asking for such an extended timeline to deliver findings -- two years. One Nation would happily support an inquiry into productivity on a much shorter, more productive timeline -- six months. We note that all inquiries are entitled to seek extensions of time from the Senate if needed, and this is common.
    • This government is murdering productivity, particularly with skyrocketing energy prices and regulations crippling productivity. With more to come, it makes productivity improvement urgent. Productivity determines standard of living, national prosperity and security, and can drive real wage growth. One Nation will oppose this motion, and we repeat through you, President, to Senator Bragg that we welcome him returning with a motion for an inquiry of six months duration.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 15 standing in the name of Senator Bragg and moved by Senator Askew be agreed to.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 32
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 32
    • Continue / Roberts, Sen Malcolm, Queensland, PHON, page 32
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:50
    • Ayes 23 [23]
      • Antic, A.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Bragg, A. J.
      • Brockman, W. E.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Chandler, C.
      • Collins, J.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Henderson, S. M.
      • Kovacic, M.
      • Liddle, K. J.
      • McDonald, S. E.
      • McLachlan, A. L.
      • O'Sullivan, M. A.
      • Paterson, J. W.
      • Payman, F.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sharma, D. N.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
    • Noes 37 [37]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Ayres, T.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Polley, H.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Whiteaker, E.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Pairs 6 [12]
      • Cadell, R. P.
      • McCarthy, M.
      • Cash, M. C.
      • Wong, P.
      • Hume, J.
      • Sterle, G.
      • McGrath, J. A.
      • Walsh, J. C.
      • McKenzie, B. G.
      • Farrell, D. E.
      • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
      • Chisholm, A. D.
    • Question negatived.

• Middle East / Order For The Production Of Documents 4 min [3]
  • Thorpe, Sen Lidia, Victoria, IND, 11:53, page 33 [31]
    • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 11:53 ( -- ) (): I move general business notices of motion Nos 53 to 55 together:
    • GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 53
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Attorney-General by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 21 August 2025:
    • (a) the complete text of any legal advice obtained or prepared concerning Australia's compliance with its obligations under international law relating to:
    • (i) genocide and the prevention of genocide, and/or
    • (ii) the occupied Palestinian territories, including decisions of United Nations bodies and the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, dated 19 July 2024;
    • (b) the facts that went into preparing any legal advice;
    • (c) identification of the individual or entity who prepared the legal advice;
    • (d) dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised;
    • (e) a list of all government officials and departments to whom the advice has been provided; and/or
    • (f) all written or digital correspondence (including all attachments to any written or digital correspondence), briefing materials, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records concerning any such legal advice.
    • GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 54
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Foreign Affairs by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 21 August 2025:
    • (a) the complete text of any legal advice obtained or prepared concerning Australia's compliance with its obligations under international law relating to:
    • (i) genocide and the prevention of genocide, and/or
    • (ii) the occupied Palestinian territories, including decisions of United Nations bodies and the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, dated 19 July 2024;
    • (b) the facts that went into preparing any legal advice;
    • (c) identification of the individual or entity who prepared the legal advice;
    • (d) dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised; and/or
    • (e) a list of all government officials and departments to whom the advice has been provided; and/or
    • (f) all written or digital correspondence (including all attachments to any written or digital correspondence), briefing materials, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records concerning any such legal advice.
    • GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 55
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 21 August 2025:
    • (a) the complete text of any legal advice obtained or prepared concerning Australia's compliance with its obligations under international law relating to:
    • (i) genocide and the prevention of genocide, and/or
    • (ii) the occupied Palestinian territories, including decisions of United Nations bodies and the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, dated 19 July 2024;
    • (b) the facts that went into preparing any such legal advice;
    • (c) identification of the individual or entity who prepared the legal advice;
    • (d) dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised;
    • (e) a list of all government officials and departments to whom the advice has been provided; and/or
    • (f) all written or digital correspondence (including all attachments to any written or digital correspondence), briefing materials, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records concerning any such legal advice.
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 11:53, page 34 2 min [6]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 11:53 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement in relation to general business notices of motion Nos 53, 54 and 55.
    • Leave is granted for one minute.
    • The government will be opposing these motions. Australia acts in accordance with our obligations under international law. Throughout the war in Gaza, the government has been consistent in our demand that all parties must abide by international humanitarian law. Australia has long been part of an international call on Israel to comply with its international obligations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We have repeatedly called on Israel to comply with the binding orders of the International Court of Justice, including its provisional orders in South Africa's case against Israel. We work with partners to assert our position through sanctions, statements and resolutions, as well as diplomatic interventions and more than $110 million in humanitarian assistance for civilians devastated by the conflict. Consistent with the longstanding practice of successive Australian governments, the government does not disclose the details of any legal advice sought or received.
    • The question is that general business notices of motion Nos 53 to 55 be agreed to.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 34
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 34
    • Continue / Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, page 34
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:55
    • Ayes 14 [14]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Thorpe, L. A. (Teller)
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
    • Noes 34 [34]
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Ayres, T.
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Polley, H.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sheldon, A. V.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whiteaker, E.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Pairs 0
    • Question negatived.
• Remote Australia Employment Service / Order For The Production Of Documents / Thorpe, Sen Lidia, Victoria, IND, 11:57, page 34 1 min [9]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 11:57 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Indigenous Australians, by 5 pm on 12 August 2025:
  • Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (a) the text of any legal advice obtained or prepared by the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA), the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) or the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PMC) regarding the compliance of the Remote Australia Employment Service (RAES), previously referred to as the New Remote Employment Services Program (N-RES), or any related other remote employment services scheme with the (the Act), or the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) as referred to in the response to question on notice no. 322 from the 2024-25 Supplementary Budget estimates cross-portfolio Indigenous matters hearings of the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee, including:
  • (i) the dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised, and
  • (ii) a list of all government officials, departments or agencies to whom the advice has been provided;
  • (b) any written communications, including emails, briefings or internal correspondence, between NIAA, PMC, DEWR or any other Commonwealth agency concerning the program's compliance with the Act or ICERD;
  • (c) the most up to date version of any grant opportunity guidelines, implementation instructions or internal decision-making rules relating to the design or rollout of the RAES, N-RES or related schemes, where such documents reflect or were informed by legal advice on compliance with the RDA or ICERD; and
  • (d) all documents and communications described above that were created, commissioned or circulated since 1 January 2023.
  • Question agreed to.
• National Disability Insurance Scheme / Order For The Production Of Documents 1 min [2]
  • Askew, Sen Wendy, Tasmania, LP, 11:58, page 35 1 min [8]
    • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 11:58 ( -- ) (): At the request of Senator Ruston, I move:
    • That --
    • (a) the Senate notes that on 29 July 2025 the Senate agreed that it does not consider that orders for the production of documents nos 229, 253 and 315 relating to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Financial Sustainability Framework have been satisfactorily complied with; and
    • (b) until the Senate resolves that the orders have been satisfactorily complied with, the Minister representing the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme be required to attend the Senate at the start of proceedings on the first day of each sitting week to provide an explanation of the failure to comply with the orders, and that:
    • (i) any senator may move to take note of the explanation, and
    • (ii) any such motion may be debated for no longer than 30 minutes, shall have precedence over all other business until determined, and senators may speak to the motion for not more than 5 minutes each.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 67, standing in the name of Senator Ruston and moved by Senator Askew, be agreed to.
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 35
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:59
    • Ayes 28 [28]
      • Antic, A.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Bragg, A. J.
      • Brockman, W. E.
      • Cadell, R. P.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Chandler, C.
      • Collins, J.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Henderson, S. M.
      • Kovacic, M.
      • Liddle, K. J.
      • McDonald, S. E.
      • McLachlan, A. L.
      • O'Sullivan, M. A.
      • Paterson, J. W.
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sharma, D. N.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Noes 34 [34]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Ayres, T.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Polley, H.
      • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Thorpe, L. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Whiteaker, E.
    • Pairs 0
    • Question negatived.

• Antic, Sen Alex, South Australia, LP, 12:03, page 36 [7]
  • South Australia 12:03 () (): I, and also on behalf of Senator Canavan, move:
  • That the following bill be introduced:
  • Sex Discrimination Act 1984 A Bill for an Act to amend the , and for related purposes.
  • Question agreed to.
  • I present the bill and move:
  • That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
  • Continue / Antic, Sen Alex, South Australia, LP, page 36
• Scarr, Sen Paul, Queensland, LP, 12:03, page 36 1 min [5]
  • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 12:03 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
  • Leave is granted for one minute.
  • While the Senate has the opportunity to reject a bill at the first reading stage, in practice, the first reading is almost always passed without opposition and is regarded as a purely formal stage. The coalition support these normal procedures as we have with many Greens, Labor or crossbench bills that we strongly opposed. The normal process enables bills to be fairly considered and debated by the Senate before a substantive decision is taken. It should only be deviated from in the most extreme of circumstances, lest we deny the right of senators to even have matters debated. As in all cases, a vote on the first reading should not be taken as a position on the substantive legislation, especially where a bill has not had the opportunity to be the subject of normal internal processes.
  • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 36
  • Continue / Scarr, Sen Paul, Queensland, LP, page 36
• McKim, Sen Nick, Tasmania, AG, 12:04, page 36 1 min [4]
  • Tasmania Australian Greens Whip 12:04 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a one-minute statement.
  • Leave granted.
  • I thank the Senate. We know exactly what Senators Antic and Canavan are up to here. They are introducing a bill that they want to use to provide a platform for transphobic people in our community to punch down on transgender Australians and, in particular, on trans kids. That's what's going on here -- they are trying to provide a platform, using parliamentary privilege, to punch down on some of the most vulnerable people in our community. Well, as far as the Australian Greens are concerned, we are never, never going to vote in this place to allow you to create that platform. Trans rights are human rights! Trans people and trans kids deserve our love and support. They deserve us to stand up and defend their right to exist, and the Australian Greens will always do that.
  • Continue / McKim, Sen Nick, Tasmania, AG, page 36
• Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 12:05, page 36 2 min [5]
  • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 12:05 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
  • Leave is granted for one minute.
  • I understand the arguments that Senator Scarr has put and agree that it is normal custom and practice in this place to allow for bills to be introduced. However, in the last term the government did take a stand on another similar bill. We took the position that we were dealing with it at the first reading stage because of the harm that could be caused by creating a platform for parliamentary debate over it and its impact on individuals -- particularly young Australians. That is the position we took in the last parliament. It is the position we are taking now. We do not agree with the Senate being a place where individual harm can be done to young people across this country. That is what would have happened had we allowed this bill to proceed in the normal course, and we won't stand for it. Trans children deserve better from this chamber.
  • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 36
  • Continue / Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, page 36
• Roberts, Sen Malcolm, Queensland, PHON, 12:07, page 37 4 min [6]
  • Queensland 12:07 () (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
  • Leave is granted for one minute.
  • What we're seeing here is an example of control, and, always, beneath control there is fear. Of what are the Greens and their coalition partner, Labor, afraid?
  • The question is that general business notion of motion No. 68 standing in the name of Senators Antic and Canavan be agreed to.
  • Interjection [2]
    • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 37
    • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 37
  • Continue / Roberts, Sen Malcolm, Queensland, PHON, page 37
• Division [5]
  • The Senate divided. 12:11
  • Ayes 25 [25]
    • Antic, A.
    • Askew, W. (Teller)
    • Babet, R. D.
    • Blyth, L.
    • Bragg, A. J.
    • Brockman, W. E.
    • Cadell, R. P.
    • Canavan, M. J.
    • Chandler, C.
    • Collins, J.
    • Duniam, J. R.
    • Henderson, S. M.
    • Kovacic, M.
    • Liddle, K. J.
    • McDonald, S. E.
    • McLachlan, A. L.
    • O'Sullivan, M. A.
    • Paterson, J. W.
    • Roberts, M. I.
    • Ruston, A.
    • Scarr, P. M.
    • Sharma, D. N.
    • Smith, D. A.
    • Stacey, W.
    • Whitten, T.
  • Noes 36 [36]
    • Allman-Payne, P. J.
    • Ananda-Rajah, M.
    • Ayres, T.
    • Brown, C. L.
    • Ciccone, R.
    • Cox, D.
    • Darmanin, L.
    • Dolega, J.
    • Dowling, R.
    • Faruqi, M.
    • Gallagher, K. R.
    • Ghosh, V.
    • Green, N. L.
    • Grogan, K. (Teller)
    • Hanson-Young, S. C.
    • Hodgins-May, S.
    • Lines, S.
    • McAllister, J. R.
    • McKim, N. J.
    • Mulholland, C.
    • O'Neill, D. M.
    • Pocock, B.
    • Pocock, D. W.
    • Polley, H.
    • Sheldon, A. V.
    • Shoebridge, D. M.
    • Smith, M. F.
    • Steele-John, J. A.
    • Stewart, J. N. A.
    • Thorpe, L. A.
    • Tyrrell, T. M.
    • Walker, C.
    • Waters, L. J.
    • Watt, M. P.
    • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
    • Whiteaker, E.
  • Pairs 6 [12]
    • Cash, M. C.
    • Wong, P.
    • Colbeck, R. M.
    • Walsh, J. C.
    • Hume, J.
    • Sterle, G.
    • McGrath, J. A.
    • McCarthy, M.
    • McKenzie, B. G.
    • Farrell, D. E.
    • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
    • Chisholm, A. D.
  • Question negatived.

• Tasmania Australian Greens Whip 12:14 ( -- ) (): I ask that general business notice of motion No. 69 be taken as a formal notion.
• Is there any objection to this motion being taken as formal?
• Yes, there is.
• There is an objection.
• Pursuant to contingent notice of motion standing in the name of Senator Waters, I move that so much of standing orders --
• We've now hit the hard marker, Senator McKim.
• Interjection [4]
  • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 37
  • Canavan, Sen Matthew, Queensland, NATS, page 37
  • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 37
  • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 38
• Continue / McKim, Sen Nick, Tasmania, AG, page 38

• Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee
• Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee
• Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Appropriations, Staffing and Security Committee Electoral Matters Joint Committee Implementation of the National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy -- Select Committee Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• Membership [2]
  • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 12:15, page 38 / 12:15 (): With the indulgence of the Senate, I am going to deal with committee memberships before we get to the address-in-reply. I have received letters nominating senators to be members of committees.
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 12:15, page 38 [19]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 12:15 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move:
    • That senators be appointed to committees as follows:
    • Appropriations, Staffing and Security -- Standing Committee --
    • Appointed -- Senators Duniam, McKenzie and Waters
    • Electoral Matters -- Joint Standing Committee --
    • Appointed -- Participating members [for the purposes of the committee's inquiry into the 2025 election]: Senators Allman-Payne, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, McKim, Barbara Pocock, Shoebridge, Steele-John, Waters and Whish-Wilson
    • Implementation of the National Redress Scheme -- Joint Standing Committee --
    • Appointed -- Participating members: Senators Allman-Payne, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, Hodgins-May, McKim, Barbara Pocock, Shoebridge, Steele-John, Waters and Whish-Wilson
    • Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy -- Select Committee --
    • Appointed --
    • Senators Canavan, McLachlan, David Pocock and Whish-Wilson
    • Participating members: Senators Allman-Payne, Antic, Askew, Blyth, Bragg, Brockman, Cadell, Cash, Chandler, Colbeck, Collins, Duniam, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, Henderson, Hodgins-May, Hume, Kovacic, Liddle, McDonald, McGrath, McKenzie, McKim, Nampijinpa Price, O'Sullivan, Paterson, Barbara Pocock, Ruston, Scarr, Sharma, Shoebridge, Dean Smith, Steele-John and Waters
    • Parliamentary Joint Committee on Parliamentary Standards --
    • Appointed -- Senator McKim
    • PFAS -- Select Committee --
    • Appointed --
    • Senator Whish-Wilson
    • Participating members: Senators Allman-Payne, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, Hodgins-May, McKim, Barbara Pocock, Shoebridge, Steele-John and Waters
    • Question agreed to.

• Consideration resumed of the motion:
• That the following address-in-reply be agreed to:
• To Her Excellency the Governor-General
• MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY --
• We, the Senate of the Commonwealth of Australia in Parliament assembled, desire to express our loyalty to our Most Gracious Sovereign and to thank Your Excellency for the speech which you have been pleased to address to Parliament.
• O'Sullivan, Sen Matt, Western Australia, LP, 12:16, page 38 14 min [21]
  • Western Australia 12:16 () (): Current world events and the destabilisation of our geopolitical climate demonstrate that Australia, despite our challenges, is a resilient and strong democracy. This should never be taken for granted. Having the opportunity to stand in this place today and make this speech after a seamless transition post election proves that we are indeed the greatest country on earth.
  • Entering my second term in the Senate, I've been reflecting on what the past six years threw at us. Obviously, for those that were also in the class of 2019, we didn't have very long in this place until, suddenly, life was far from normal. COVID entered the scene in early 2020, and we were trying to work out what it meant for Australia. Parliament was cancelled, and we spent all that time in isolation. We Western Australians spent a few too many days cooped up in hotel rooms -- or, as it was for me, in a caravan -- after parliamentary sittings. Then came the economic shocks, the supply chain challenges -- we all remember the rush on toilet paper -- the rising inflation, the growing uncertainty in global affairs and the creeping sense that things would never be the same. And we've faced compounding pressures on families, small businesses, budgets and national morale. Yet here we are.
  • I'd like to take this opportunity to acknowledge some of my colleagues who have finished their service in this place and the other place. Firstly, I acknowledge our leader last term, Peter Dutton. Peter was a great support to me, and I'm incredibly grateful to him and his family. The election result was disappointing, but Peter deserves recognition and respect for his almost 25 years as a member of parliament, including as a cabinet minister and, most recently, the Leader of the Opposition.
  • Secondly, I acknowledge my fellow Western Australian, former senator Linda Reynolds. Linda has been such a strong advocate for Western Australian and the coalition. Linda, you can be proud of your contribution and what you achieved in our nation's parliament.
  • I would also like to acknowledge my other colleagues Hollie Hughes, Perin Davey and David Fawcett. Thank you for being such great colleagues and supporters and for all the work that you did in this place. I wish you the very best for what comes next.
  • It is through these reflections that you realise the immense privilege that it is to serve in the Australian parliament. I never want a day to go by without that feeling of great pride. We should never feel entitled or be comfortable in this job, for it is for Western Australians and it is with Western Australians, who have placed their trust in me to represent them and deliver for them.
  • This is a sobering time for the Liberal Party. The results of the past two elections highlight that much has gone wrong. It is easy to rush to judgement, despair or fear and think that it will always be, but there are important lessons for me and indeed for the whole coalition. This moment that we're in right now presents a new opportunity, and we must seize it. The great Sir Robert Menzies once reminded us that 'the greatest enemy to present joy and high hopes is the cultivation of retrospective bitterness'. Drawing on past grievances won't help us rebuild, but honest reflection, clarity of purpose and renewed commitment to our longstanding beliefs will.
  • Like it or not, voters always get it right. You may not like the decision, but in a democracy they are the better judge. It's clear Australians did not think that the coalition was ready to govern. With the benefit of hindsight, I suspect they were right. In my view, we failed to express some of our most important beliefs, the very same beliefs for which we've seen the coalition elected many times before. How can we be the party of lower taxes and sound economic management if we oppose tax cuts and fail to deliver and outline a clear vision for tax reform? With bracket creep coming into sharper focus, we cannot afford to sit on the sidelines and allow it to happen. Put simply, it's robbing hardworking Australians of money that should be in their back pockets and not in the Treasury.
  • Speaking of robbery, this is what the current Treasurer is doing with the proposed tax on superannuation for those with a balance of $3 million or more. You know it's a bad idea when the father of superannuation, former prime minister Paul Keating, is saying that this is unconscionable. He knows, like everyone else, that it needs to be indexed; otherwise, the very workers that he sought to protect by creating this superannuation guarantee will be the ones most affected by Treasurer Chalmers's foolish ideas.
  • With millions of Australians paying billions in tax each year, the electorate is crying out for taxation reform. With productivity continuing to decline, reforming the tax system is one pathway to restoring it. We face a very simple choice: should governments find more ways to tax Australians, or should we collectively work together to get Australia's budget back into a sustainable position? As Liberals, it should definitely be the latter. It is in our DNA. But we need to find the collective will and courage to fight for this. I firmly believe that, if we contest the next election with a vision of economic strength and a plan for tax reform, Australians will see the coalition as the alternative government that they've been looking for. We must cast a vision for Australia, something more than just good policy.
  • Under the leadership of the Hon. Sussan Ley, I've been privileged to serve in her shadow ministry as the shadow minister for infrastructure, fisheries and forestry. These sectors are critical to the Australian economy. Infrastructure impacts Australians every day. Through efficient and safe infrastructure, we enable businesses to boost productivity and transport goods. We enable people to get to work safely, parents to do the school run, public transport to operate and so on. In this portfolio, I'll be primarily investigating the need to improve road safety. Last year, 1,300 lives were lost on our roads, the highest in a decade. That is one less person at family dinners or at Christmas gatherings. We must ensure that funds are allocated correctly to make our roads safer, and I'd add to that we must ensure that projects are delivered on time and on budget for that to occur.
  • I'll also champion the infrastructure needs of my home state, Western Australia. Infrastructure fuels economic growth, yet WA seems to be missing out, despite being the engine room of this country, as I'm sure you'd agree, Acting Deputy President Cox. A 2019 Australian infrastructure audit estimated that congestion in Perth would cost $3.1 billion annually by 2031. Winding roads and freeways are sensible, but often we react to congestion rather than proactively plan and build before it becomes an issue. We also need to rethink commuting options. Perth has one of the lowest rates of walking and cycling trips nationwide. According to Infrastructure Australia, there are 4.2 million private car trips daily, with 2.8 million under five kilometres.
  • The other major element of my portfolio is fisheries and forestry, two industries under constant attack by the Australian Labor Party and the Greens. Along with Senator Cadell, I work constructively to ensure government policies support these industries and enable sustainable operation for future generations. Bizarrely, the Left seems hell-bent on squeezing these industries until they collapse. In WA, the Cook Labor government has banned native logging, with little regard for the regional towns that relied on it and offering limited alternative economic opportunities. Let me be clear: while the coalition agrees that these industries must operate sustainably, we also believe in the people and the towns that rely on them and the vibrant economy that they contribute to. My family hails from Manjimup, a beautiful part of the world. I love native forests, but everything must be balanced, and a total ban is not the answer.
  • As many of you know, I also love the great outdoors. During recent school holidays, only a few weeks ago, my family and I drove the Great Central Road to the Red Centre. This is the road that cuts straight through from Laverton all the way to Uluru. It's Australia's longest road route and it's an incredible shortcut. In fact, it's known as the great shortcut. It saves you about 1,200 kilometres if you take that direct route rather than going through Port Augusta and across the Nullarbor. The journey along the Great Central Road is an epic odyssey. There remains a 736-kilometre unsealed section on the Western Australian side. Having experienced it firsthand, I will advocate for this part to be fully sealed. I want to give a special shout-out to the Mayor of Laverton, Patrick Hill. He has led this cause for over 25 years. He is someone who deserves great recognition.
  • A heads-up to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee budget estimates process: I will be coming to that committee with many questions on why this road has not been sealed already. The funding is there. My initial investigations suggest that the delays are linked to native title issues. The Morrison government allocated $400 million to this project. The money's sitting there. But the state Labor government has sat on it for over three years. My understanding is that the conflicted areas cover only a small part of the route, so why is the Albanese government allowing it to stall?
  • This is a vital infrastructure project for Western Australia and, indeed, the nation. A third transport link into WA is critical. Two years ago, there was a fire down on the Nullarbor and a flood up in the Kimberley. The flood destroyed the Fitzroy Crossing bridge, and, of course, the transcontinental railway and the Eyre Highway were blocked by the fire. Freight had to be shipped from either Melbourne or Adelaide to get across to Perth. That included groceries. The case for sealing this route is clear, and the inaction shows that WA is being taken for granted. I'll have more to say about this in coming months.
  • In closing, much work remains for my party to return to government. It's obvious the Australian people didn't think that we were ready to govern on 3 May. The Liberal Party has a lot of rebuilding to do. But, when faced with adversity, we should meet those challenges head-on. Restoring trust with the electorate, delivering policies that bring meaningful change and building a stronger Australia for families should be our guiding goal. Building a stronger Australia starts with stronger families. Policies like income splitting for families with young children are more than good ideas -- and a special shout-out to you, Senator Collins, for your great first speech last night and for raising this important topic. They recognise that the great sacrifices of stay-at-home parents are important. These mothers and fathers do vital work raising the next generation and deserve a fair tax system that honours their choices rather than punishing them.
  • The climate paradox : why we need to reset action on climate change On education, we need to get back to basics. Every Australian child deserves a solid foundation in literacy and numeracy within a calm and orderly classroom. This involves backing evidence based teaching methods and raising standards, not lowering them. On energy and climate, Tony Blair, in his foreword to the paper , makes it clear: we cannot meet our climate goals with ideological divides that continue to hold us back. Australia needs realism and support for technologies that can deliver clean, reliable, affordable power. Nuclear energy should be on the table, not as a last resort but as part of our energy mix. I want to be part of a process that makes these changes happen, not one that stalls progress -- a process that seeks to improve rather than stifle good ideas.
  • There are many challenges facing us as a nation. One of them, of course, will be the advancement of artificial intelligence. We're less than 18 months away from having artificial general intelligence. That is going to profoundly change the way we go about life. It will happen within this term of parliament. Within this term of parliament, we will see dramatic changes in the way that our lives are impacted. In fact, it's going to impact upon government, and it's going to impact upon revenue. There are many challenges that we are going to have to face in this parliament.
  • In the Liberal Party, we've faced lows before. We're at an all-time low right now, but we can deal with it. We've been written off before. We've been written off as out of touch before. We've been written off, but we will rise again. As the 40th president of the United States, who endured a period in the political wilderness himself, once said:
  • From times of hardship, we've always emerged with a renewed sense of confidence and a determination to meet and to conquer whatever challenges lie ahead.
• Whiteaker, Sen Ellie, Western Australia, ALP, 12:30, page 41 15 min [16]
  • Western Australia 12:30 () (): I'm delighted to speak to this address-in-reply today. I want to thank the Governor-General for her generosity to us in recent weeks -- in particular, to us new parliamentarians. Her Excellency welcomed new senators and members to Government House while we were at school earlier this month and then opened Government House to our families ahead of the first sitting last week. I also thank her for her address to senators and members in this place, setting out the government's agenda for the term.
  • On 3 May, the Australian people made their voices heard. Australians re-elected the Albanese Labor government for a second term with an increased majority -- and an historic majority at that. It's a very clear endorsement of the work that the Prime Minister and the Labor government did in the first term and of the plan we presented to build a better future for our country -- a plan to deliver cost-of-living relief, to strengthen Medicare, to get more people into their first home, to create a more accessible universal early childhood education and care system and to build a future made in Australia. It's a clear mandate to deliver on that plan. In my home state of Western Australia, it's a mandate to continue to keep WA's economy strong, to make more things in WA and to keep helping Western Australian families. That is exactly what we will do. Western Australians know that it is only under a Labor government that they will see action on the things that matter most to them.
  • This government has been really clear. Tackling the cost of living is our No. 1 priority. We want Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn, and we've made good progress. The Albanese government has got wages up and brought inflation down, but we know that cost-of-living challenges are still being felt by many Australians. That's why we will do more. Following the recent federal budget, the government legislated tax cuts that took effect on the first of this month. These changes will deliver real tax relief to every Australian taxpayer, helping ease cost-of-living pressures and tackling bracket creep head-on. It's a meaningful step to put more money back into the pockets of Australians.
  • We're not stopping there. Further rounds of tax cuts will be locked in for 2026 and 2027 -- fair and simple relief for low- and middle-income earners. On 1 July this year, award and minimum wage workers, including those in hospitality, retail and community services, received a 3.5 per cent pay rise -- a real pay rise, above inflation. It's something Labor fought for. Just this week, we've been legislating to cut HECS debt, to make medicines cheaper and to protect penalty rates. We're also delivering more support for parents -- extending paid parental leave to six months so that families can spend more time together at home in those early months when they most need to be with their new babies. And for the first time, superannuation will be included on government paid parental leave, a crucial step in ensuring women are better off in their retirement and in closing the gap that so often emerges over the course of many women's lives when they take time off to have a family.
  • We are also delivering another round of power bill credits -- another $150 credit for every household -- to help bring down household costs. Treasury estimates that this will directly reduce headline inflation by around half a percentage point in 2025 and reduce household bills by 712 per cent, on average, compared to bills without the extension. In WA, along with the power bill credits delivered by the Cook Labor government in recent years, these credits have meant Western Australians have received significant bill relief at the time they needed it most.
  • Australians are proud of our world-class healthcare system, and Labor is proud to have created it. Medicare was established by the Hawke government over 50 years ago, and the Albanese Labor government will honour that legacy by making the single largest investment in Medicare ever. In the last term, the government opened 87 Medicare urgent care clinics right across the country, with plans to establish a further 50 this term. This will mean that four in five Australians will live within a 20-minute drive of a Medicare urgent care clinic, within a 20-minute drive of free walk-in care. The government will establish 1800MEDICARE, a 24-hour free health advice service that will help save Australians from unnecessary trips to the emergency department. And we will roll out our plan to make more GP visits free, because we know you shouldn't need your credit card to get the health care you need. Only Labor can be trusted to strengthen Medicare, because we created it and we will always protect it.
  • We know that many Australians are working hard, doing all the right things, but are still struggling to buy a home or afford -- or even find -- a rental, and that's why housing is a key priority for this government. We are making it easier for first home buyers to buy a home, with a plan to support five per cent deposits, in every town, every city and every region across our country. And we'll build 100,000 new homes to be set aside specifically for first home buyers so that they're not competing with investors just to get a foot in the door. These measures will shave years off the time it takes to save for a deposit and will open the door to a new generation of homeownership. We're also making renting fairer, having already worked with a number of states around the country to ban no-grounds evictions, cap rent increases and set minimum rental standards. We've increased rental assistance by 45 per cent, helping more than a million households keep a roof over their heads.
  • Ultimately, though, we know the best way to make housing more affordable is to simply build more of them. That's why this government will deliver the biggest housing construction program in our nation's history -- 1.2 million new homes, including 55,000 social and affordable homes, through the Housing Australia Future Fund and other initiatives. We're investing in the infrastructure to support that growth, cutting red tape and backing the tradies who'll build them, because housing should be within reach, whether you're looking to buy, renting or just looking for a safe roof over your head.
  • The Albanese government knows that early learning sets the foundation for everything that follows. It helps kids start school ready to learn and it helps parents get back to or stay in work. That's why we will guarantee three days a week of subsidised early learning education for children who need it, beginning on 1 January next year. This will make a real difference for more than 100,000 working families. Those earning between $50,000 and $100,000 will save, on average, $1,460 per year. That's real cost-of-living relief.
  • Making early education and care the best it can be, the best possible quality, is a key priority for our government. That's why we are also supporting new and expanded centres where they're needed most with our Building Early Education Fund. It's a billion dollars to make sure all families, no matter where they live, can access quality education and care centres for their children. It will support early education and care in our outer suburbs, in regional towns and in our fastest-growing communities -- the areas most in need of more funding. It will help not-for-profit providers grow, will support co-located services on school grounds and will look at ways we can directly invest in centres. All of this is part of the government's plan to make early education and care more affordable, more available and more universal, ensuring every child, no matter where they live or what their background is, can thrive from their earliest years. The Prime Minister has been clear. He wants to build a universal education and care system where every child can access high-quality early education that is simple, affordable and accessible, and that is what we are doing.
  • We are also building a future made in Australia in our cities, our regions and our communities that power our economy. The government will continue to drive that investment in local manufacturing, because our ambition doesn't end at digging things out of the ground. We want to process, manufacture and value-add right here at home. We are backing industry that will convert these minerals, many of which are in my home state of Western Australia, into solar panels and batteries -- the very technologies that will power the next century of Australian homes and businesses.
  • And we're helping Australian households be a part of that clean energy future too. We will subsidise the cost of home batteries for Australian households, reducing their power bills for life. Our $2.3 billion Cheaper Home Batteries Program will help more than a million households install home batteries by 2030. It will reduce the cost of a typical battery by around 30 per cent. Families with rooftop solar will be able to store their own power and use it when they need it. It will cut power bills by up to $1,100 per year. The program builds on that same trusted scheme that helped millions of households install solar, and we're extending that success to batteries. We are also supporting small businesses and communities to install batteries, helping more Australians reduce their reliance on the grid and pushing down power prices for everyone. This is a smart energy policy and it is real cost-of-living relief.
  • We are lowering bills, cutting emissions and keeping investment flowing into Australian manufacturing. The Albanese government is committed to making more things here in Australia and more things in Western Australia. Whether it's batteries or ferries to expand WA's public transport network, we're creating good, local jobs. We're also investing in transport infrastructure to support Perth's growing suburbs, including in my own neck of the woods, with works to widen the Kwinana Freeway to reduce traffic congestion and enhance freight efficiency.
  • The Albanese government is delivering on its promises for working people. We're training the next generation of tradies, with nearly 600,000 free TAFE places already delivered. Apprentices in construction and clean energy are now eligible for a $10,000 support payment to help them stay on course and finish their training. Today, the Senate passed our bill to cut student debt by 20 per cent, just like Labor promised. We know this is a game changer for Australians just starting their careers, saving for their first home, juggling a mortgage or raising young kids. Every little bit helps. And we're going even further, raising the repayment threshold so people aren't forced to start paying debt when they can least afford it.
  • For our kids in school, we're getting every school in every state on a path to full funding. As part of our agreement with the states, we're lifting the Commonwealth contribution from 20 per cent to 25 per cent of the school resourcing standard. The funding is tied to the reforms needed to lift education standards right across the country. It means more help for students and more help for teachers.
  • This is all about fairness. It's about giving Australians a better start and delivering on the commitments we made, because that's what good government looks like. Labor's vision is clear. We are backing working people. We're backing families. This government is committed to building Australia's future.
• Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, 12:45, page 43 16 min [26]
  • South Australia Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 12:45 ( -- ) (): I too today rise to speak on the Governor-General's address to this place on the opening of the 48th Parliament. Can I firstly express my absolute appreciation and gratitude to the people of South Australia for the privilege once again of serving them in this place and being sworn into the 48th Parliament. I can absolutely commit to the people of South Australia that I will continue, first and foremost, to fight hardest for their interests, as I have done in my previous 12 years -- nearly 13 years -- here, because in this place our first duty is always to represent the state that elected us to be here.
  • Right now, there couldn't be an issue that is more important to prosecute in this place on behalf of the people of South Australia than the absolutely devastating algal bloom that is occurring in the Gulf of St Vincent. We've known now for probably seven or eight months that this algal bloom is threatening marine life and the economic lives of those people that rely on the gulf for their livelihoods, whether that be the communities, the fishers, the tourism operators or the other businesses that are in those communities. This algal bloom has threatened them over the last six months. It continues to threaten them, and they remain in a state of incredible uncertainty because we don't actually know what our governments -- both the state government and the federal government -- are intending to do in order to support those communities and, most particularly, to understand what needs to be done to get rid of this algal bloom and ensure it doesn't happen again and then, of course, once the algal bloom has been dealt with in whatever way is appropriate, manage the cleanup that follows and support those communities as they get back on their feet.
  • I say that because, as I said, we've known about the algal bloom since December last year. There's been concern expressed, and yet very little was done. Very little has been done by the state government and the federal government. We now find ourselves in a situation where the algal bloom is quite catastrophic, and everybody is wondering what they are going to do to deal with this problem. We know that it is impacted by warmer weather. As we are now slowly creeping our way out of winter into spring, we know that the threat the algal bloom currently presents is only going to heighten.
  • So it's too little too late, but we now need to make sure that we are acting with absolute urgency to deal with this. We can't have a situation where our governments don't care about it when we see an impact on the beaches of Edithburgh and Stansbury. But I'm telling you that this will now hit the beaches of Brighton and Glenelg, and maybe then, as it hits our metropolitan beaches, we will see the government take this more seriously. Unfortunately the track records of this government and the one in South Australia have shown it only matters if it occurs in our cities.
  • One of the biggest issues that we saw during the last term and we saw during the election campaign -- and Her Excellency the Governor-General raised it in her address to this parliament on behalf of the government that leads the 48th Parliament -- was Medicare. I want to reflect on a matter of serious consequence to the Australian public, and that is the Albanese government's preparedness to continue to repeatedly mislead the Australian public about Medicare, particularly about whether you need your credit card or whether you are going to have out-of-pocket costs when you go to see your GP. During the campaign, the Prime Minister confidently declared on a number of occasions:
  • One card covers it all.
  • Not your credit card -- your Medicare card.
  • He reiterated this promise in excess of 71 times during the campaign, promising all Australians would need is their Medicare card to see a GP for free.
  • The election goes by. Australians are continuously misled about the out-of-pocket costs that they are going to be paying. Australians also know right now they have never paid more out of their pockets when they go to see a GP. The Prime Minister, I think, knew what he was telling Australians wasn't true, but the sad fact is that now, following the election, we find out that the Prime Minister's own Department of Health and Aged Care, under FOI and the incoming government brief, confirms that the government's modelling showed that 25 per cent of GP clinics will not bulk-bill under the government's own policy framework. That statistic completely and utterly shatters the Prime Minister's promise to Australians that they would not require anything more than their Medicare card when they visited a GP.
  • We also see other independent and reliable sources like the RACGP, AMA, Cleanbill and the like, underpinning the report from the Department of Health and Aged Care in relation to the very unlikely chance of the quotes of the Prime Minister ever coming true, with reports from all of these organisations saying that GPs will not be in a position to be able to fully bulk-bill Australians, which is the promise the Prime Minister continuously made -- in fact, it was made 71 times. And we also saw this week the Minister for Health and Ageing belled the cat in his recent comments to morning television, when he said:
  • We never said there'd be a hundred per cent bulk billing.
  • Well, I'd like to understand the difference between 100 per cent bulk-billing that the minister says they never promised and the Prime Minister promising Australians that all you would need is your Medicare card. I would really like to understand how the Prime Minister and the health minister can conceive they are saying the same thing. But the Prime Minister has been absolutely unequivocal in his promise to Australians.
  • Let me be clear, the coalition wants Australians to be able to get timely access to affordable healthcare. We hope the Prime Minister actually hasn't lied to Australians. Unfortunately, we fear that he has. And the worst part of it is that not only are Australians having to put their hand in their pocket every time they see their GP but the amount of money they have to pull out of their pocket has never been higher. Right now, out of pocket costs to see your GP are the highest they have ever been. They increased 45 per cent in the three years of the first term of the Albanese Labor government.
  • We've also seen bulk-billing rates falling from over 88 per cent when we left government to 77 per cent now. That is an 11 per cent drop in bulk-billing rates over the three years of the Albanese government, and yet many opposite still come in here and actually mislead this place by suggesting, for some reason, that bulk-billing rates have gone up under Labor. The facts, the statistics, the national accounts and your very own department's figures all show bulk-billing rates have plummeted by 11 per cent. As a result of that, last year alone there were 40 million fewer bulk-billed visits to our GPs in Australia. That's 40 million more visits to the GP where people have actually had to pay out-of-pocket costs, and they have risen on average to $48 per consultation.
  • As a result of this, people are not going to see the doctor, because, they say, they can't afford to do so. Last year, 1.5 million Australians said that they didn't visit their doctor because they couldn't afford to. That's 1.5 million Australians who were forced into making a decision between going to the doctor and putting food on the table, meeting their mortgage repayments and paying for their groceries, their electricity and their insurance. These are the decisions that are being forced upon Australians, and they are not decisions that Australians should ever be making. But the reality is that, when people avoid seeing the doctor and avoid getting primary care, they inevitably become sicker. Inevitably, when they become sicker, the place they end up in is our emergency departments or ramped in ambulances outside of our hospitals. Not only is that really bad for the person who's impacted; it also means there is additional pressure on our hospital systems. We know that, once you get sicker, the cost of that care is so much higher.
  • What we've seen is a government that has run around telling stories to Australians to try and hide from the fact that, by every metric in the healthcare system, it has failed Australians in the last three years. It is a national failure of this government. The Labor government came to power promising to strengthen Medicare, and, in reality, all this Labor government has done is weaken it. But, most distressingly, we have a Prime Minister who is prepared to lie to Australians about something as important as their access to health care. The reality is that Australians know that it's never been harder or more expensive to see a doctor.
  • ( Senator Marielle Smith ): Senator Ruston, I ask you to withdraw your comment a few moments back, which I think you're aware of. Can you please withdraw?
  • I will withdraw. The fact is that these promises have been made to Australians, and I can assure the people of South Australia that, as your representative in this place, I will be holding the government to account to make sure that it delivers on the promises that it has made to you. If it does not deliver on those promises, I will make sure that you are well aware of the fact that you were misled in the lead-up to this election, because you deserve, as every other Australian deserves, easy and quick access to affordable health care in Australia. It is a fundamental right of all Australians.
  • But this is not the only promise that was broken. In the 2022 election, the then opposition, as it sought to become the government, made a number of promises to the Australian public. During the previous term of this parliament, it failed to deliver most of them. The reality is that the challenges that we were facing in the last term haven't gone away. Australians are still struggling with the cost of living. It doesn't matter how many times the government tell everybody how fabulously they're doing and about all the wonderful things they're doing, Australians know because they can feel it in their hip pocket. They can feel it in their family budgets. They feel it every time they go to the supermarket or go to pay their mortgage.
  • There's another promise that this government made that it's failed to keep. We know that we're in the midst of a housing crisis in this country. The Housing Australia Future Fund promised so much to Australians, yet in this place we have failed to get the government to even tell us how many houses have been built by this Housing Australia Future Fund. I fear that it's probably a very low number. My understanding is that it's probably only 17. Half a billion dollars in the last 12 months was allocated from the Housing Australia Future Fund to build houses for Australians, yet we understand that probably fewer than 20 have been constructed already.
  • When it comes to aged care, in 2022, this government came in on a platform of saying it was going to put the 'care' back into aged care. I cannot possibly see how denying 87,000 Australians, as we stand here today, the care that they have been assessed as needing achieves that when this government refuses to release the home-care packages that are needed to get rid of the waitlist that has absolutely blown out under this government. That is a waitlist that's more than doubled in the last three years, and the wait is three times longer than it was three years ago. How on earth can this government think that is putting the 'care' back in to aged care?
  • The government went to the election promising 83,000 new home-care packages to try and deal with the waitlist that has blown out under its time in government, and what do we see? The government's first action following the election was the withdrawal of those 83,000 packages for the Australians who are currently waiting on the priority waiting list. They've withdrawn them, so these people are once again left without the care that they have been professionally assessed as needing.
  • The other thing the government needs to come to terms with is the fact it cannot review its way through this next term of government. The last term of government was absolutely littered with review after review after review. The time for review is over. It is time for action. We need to actually do some of the things that Australians were promised in 2022. Most of the promises that were made in 2022 that were not able to be kept have been re-promised in 2025. I say to the government: if you are serious about delivering the agenda that the Governor-General set out and laid out in her speech to this place, then you need to stop reviewing and you need to start doing.
  • I hope the government deliver in this next term of government, because the Australian public deserve nothing less from their government. I fear that they won't, but all of us on the coalition side, for the sake of Australians, hope they actually do something this time.
  • Interjection / Smith, Sen Marielle (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), South Australia, ALP, page 44
  • Continue / Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, page 44
• Dowling, Sen Richard, Tasmania, ALP, 13:01, page 45 8 min [18]
  • Tasmania 13:01 () (): Again, I note this is not my first speech. It is a great honour to rise today in reply to the Her Excellency the Governor-General's speech marking the opening of the 48th Parliament. I thank Her Excellency for the generosity and clarity with which she spoke of the government's legislative agenda. Her speech struck a tone that was both optimistic and clear-eyed, one that acknowledged our strengths as a nation and our responsibilities as a parliament. The values she invoked -- kindness, courage, humility and service -- are values that I believe in and, I'd hope, this whole chamber believes in. They are values that I know are lived every day by the people I represent, from Hobart's eastern shore to the Huon Valley, from Devonport to the West Coast, and every community in between.
  • Australians returned the Albanese government with a strengthened mandate because we've delivered and because we've listened. We've brought fairness and stability back into economic management, with tax cuts for every Australian, not just the top end of town. We've invested in the fundamentals that support our prosperity for future generations: Medicare, schools, housing, clean energy and secure jobs. We as a Labor Party and as a government know the work is not finished and that we must do more. And we want to do more. The Australian people expect us to do more, and they trust us to do more.
  • The 48th Parliament has opened with a clear and urgent focus: cutting student debt by 20 per cent. In my home state of Tasmania, last year the average outstanding student debt was almost $23,000. A 20 per cent reduction in that debt is worth more than $412 thousand to each of the over 50,000 Tasmanians who will benefit. We're also raising the repayment thresholds and moving to a fairer marginal repayment system.
  • Other focus areas include making child care safer, more affordable and more accessible to more families; strengthening Medicare -- the roll-out of 87 Medicare urgent care clinics across Australia, with 50 more to be built over the next three years, and the establishment of 1800MEDICARE; a $10 billion investment to build 100,000 new homes just for first home buyers; tackling cost-of-living pressures with practical, targeted support; making education more affordable and more accessible for all Australians, with fee-free TAFE right across the country and, as mentioned, cutting 20 per cent of all student loan debts; supporting older Australians through aged-care and pension reform; advancing the National Reconstruction Fund to drive local manufacturing; strengthening our defence capability and deepening our regional engagement; continuing the transition to clean energy with confidence and ambition; and boosting our nation's productivity, growing our economy and making sure everyone stands to benefit -- whatever they do and wherever they live.
  • Labor's agenda has been embraced by millions of Australians on a scale that few predicted at the start of the election. You'd think such a result would give pause for thought from the other side. Indeed, just last week, we heard from the other side that the election result was 'humiliating' and warranted time for reflection -- reflection, we are told, that will result in them being 'more constructive'. Yet, in the next breath, we heard nothing but derision about some of the very policies those millions of Australians clearly voted for across every state and territory.
  • There is no alternative from the other side. They have lost touch with Australian needs, wants and expectations. Australians need action on the cost of living, whether that be through energy bill relief, reducing student debt, cheaper medicines, access to free TAFE, or affordable childcare. Australians want to know that they and their families will get a fair go, that the economy they work in will reward effort, that they'll be able to buy their own home, that their children will be safe at childcare and that their elderly parents will be looked after with dignity in their final years.
  • Australians expect action on climate change. That is why we've announced a $2 billion expansion of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. Contrast this with the other side, who, in the first week of parliament, were already arguing with themselves about net zero targets.
  • The government's priorities must be delivered in every region, and that includes my region -- my home state of Tasmania. For young Tasmanians, particularly first-in-family university students from rural areas, the wiping of indexation and reduction of HECS debt can be the difference between staying in the state or leaving Tasmania altogether. HECS debt relief will make a huge difference for approximately 52,000 Tasmanians. It's not only cost-of-living relief; it's an investment in people who have made an investment in themselves and in improving their future.
  • On childcare safety: in Tasmania's smaller communities, where services are often stretched and staff are in short supply, ensuring that national standards on childcare safety are enforced and properly resourced will matter deeply to working families. When it comes to affordable housing, there are too many Tasmanians unable to buy their own home who are waiting too long for social housing or who have to continually move around because they're renting. Just yesterday, my office had a call from an elderly woman concerned about what was going to happen to her after her landlord sells the home she's been renting for years. The government's build-to-rent scheme will give greater security to tenants, with five-year leases. Homeownership is a way for people to genuinely own a stake in the economy and a way to help support intergenerational equity. For this we need to build more homes and unlock more land supply.
  • On the cost-of-living issue: from petrol prices in Queenstown to the cost of groceries in Sorell, Tasmanians feel the pinch of distance and distribution. That's why targeted relief like energy bill rebates and rent support must reflect regional realities.
  • Turning to clean energy: Tasmania's leadership in hydro, wind and emerging green hydrogen means we're well placed to play a central role in Australia's clean energy transition. But we need national coordination and long-term investment certainty to maximise that role.
  • On the topic of aged care: in towns across Tasmania, aged care isn't an abstract policy; it's deeply personal and community based. Reform must lift standards, improve workforce conditions and respect rural providers.
  • Like many in this chamber, I've come to this place with a belief that politics should be about practical progress and that governments should be a force for good. From Rosny College to this red chamber, I've seen how public policy shapes lives and how it must evolve to meet new challenges.
  • One area that I hope to contribute to is improving the nation's productivity. Only through productivity improvements can we achieve higher living standards for the next generation. It won't be an easy task, but it's one we should confront with optimism and confidence.
  • Whether on economic development, education or the energy transition, I'm here to contribute constructively and to ensure that Tasmanian voices are not only heard but central to national decision-making. The Governor-General said:
  • ... democracy is always a work in progress -- one that thrives when ideas and propositions are subject to robust, but respectful, interrogation.
  • She's right. That means disagreeing well, listening, acting in good faith and delivering results that improve lives -- not just for the loudest or the most powerful, but for every Australian.
  • This 48th Parliament opens at a time of global uncertainty but also of national opportunity. Let us use this opportunity well. Let's live up to the faith Australians have placed in us. Let's govern with the values Her Excellency reminded us of -- humility, strength and service -- for Tasmania, for the nation and for future generations.
• Sharma, Sen Dave, New South Wales, LP, 13:09, page 47 16 min [18]
  • New South Wales 13:09 () (): Australia faces immense challenges. We live in a dangerous and more unstable world, our geographic isolation no longer affords us the protection that it once did, and the liberal international trading system which has done so much to underpin Australian prosperity is under threat. Our Defence Force is underfunded and underequipped, and our economy, once the envy of the world, is stagnating.
  • Australia is a great and prosperous nation, but this is not the result of dumb luck or mere chance. It's something that we have built collectively, through active choices and decisions taken over decades. Our economic success has been built by hard work, by liberal economic policies, by a thriving private sector, by competition and dynamism, by a willingness to embrace new technologies and new methods of working, and by ensuring that effort, enterprise and risk taking are rewarded, not punished. Unless and until such time as we rediscover those principles, unless and until such time as we get our economy out of its rut and get it moving again, our other national challenges will only grow more profound. We will not be able to modernise and enlarge our defence forces, as we so desperately need to do. We will not be able to modernise or upgrade our infrastructure. We will not be able to continue to fund generous social services and health care. We will not be able to care for communities in need, be they the elderly or those with a disability. Turning a blind eye to the profound economic challenges we face, or pretending -- as this government has done over the past three years -- that we have no agency or ability to address them, is national negligence of the highest order.
  • In her address, the Governor-General noted the government's newly found interest in productivity and in a more resilient and diversified economy. It's refreshing to hear this Labor government finally acknowledge the scale of economic challenges facing our nation. At least the era of denial seems to be over. If the Labor government are genuine about seeking to address these challenges, then they will find a constructive partner in the Liberal Party. I'm very grateful to have been appointed as the shadow assistant minister for competition, charities and Treasury by the Leader of the Opposition, and I look forward to working with my colleagues across this parliament to scrutinise, hold to account and support, where warranted, this government's economic policy.
  • But let's be honest about our challenges. Under this Labor government, we've got lower living standards, we've got higher debt, we've got higher taxes, we've got stagnant productivity, and we've got anaemic business investment. The government now say their ambition for rising wages, growth and productivity requires a unified national effort. Well, this damascene conversion is welcome, but Australians are right to ask: where has this ambition been for the past three years? We've seen GDP per capita -- the best measure of family, household and individual prosperity -- in sustained decline under this government. It's likely that GDP per capita will not recover to 2022 levels until 2030. That is a lost decade. We've had productivity stagnant since Labor came to office. It currently sits at 2016 levels.
  • We've had this government take $144 billion in new spending decisions since coming to office and, in addition, spend much of the windfall from high commodity prices. In the last budget, we saw government spending growing at six per cent, four times faster than the rate at which the economy is growing. That is unsustainable. And it's reflected in the jobs figures. Four in five jobs created in the past two years have been in the non-market sector, propelled by government spending. This is the only part of the economy that is actually growing, the non-market sector.
  • Business investment is close to the debts last seen in the middle of the 1990s recession, over three decades ago. The OECD estimates that Australia has a 30 per cent shortfall in investment relative to economic output, making us the third worst-placed country in the OECD on this metric. Our energy costs are now some of the highest in the developed world when they were once amongst the lowest and formed a key plank of our competitive advantage. Energy is an input into every facet of economic activity, and high energy costs effectively act as a tax on production. This deterioration in competitive advantage is a direct result of the flawed energy transition being pursued by this Labor government.
  • I now want to turn to productivity, which is the topic of many speeches at present and the focus of the government's upcoming economic reform summit in August. As the Productivity Commission has rightly identified, productivity growth has accounted for 80 per cent of national income growth over the past 80 years. That means that productivity is the basis of higher living standards. It underpins economic growth. It's why this generation of Australians is materially better off, with more opportunities and better health than previous generations of Australians. The only way that today's parents can expect their children to have a better standard of life and more opportunity is if we get productivity moving again.
  • As Ken Henry noted in his recent Press Club address, unless Labor's anaemic productivity is rebooted, this government will need to raise taxes by as much as five per cent of GDP. That is the pathway we are heading down: a low-productivity, high-cost, high-tax, high-spend economy. Ken Henry further noted that the average Australian today is cumulatively half a million dollars worse off because of the failure to match our productivity performance in the last two decades of the 2000s to that of the 1980s and 1990s. But it's important to understand that our productivity performance is not uniform. In the market sector -- the private sector, largely -- productivity has increased by 35 per cent since 2000. But, in the non-market sector -- the sector which is overwhelmingly government owned, operated or funded -- productivity has grown by just two per cent in that period. So that's an increase of 35 per cent in the market sector since 2000 and an increase of two per cent in the non-market sector since 2000. Remember, four out of five jobs created in the past two years have been in the non-market sector.
  • It is this growth in government spending which is driving the creation of non-market sector jobs, crowding out the private sector and hurting our overall national productivity. But, even in the market sector, productivity performance has been patchy. In construction, for instance, which is worth highlighting, labour productivity has gone backwards in past decades. In the past two decades, for instance, labour productivity in dwelling construction has fallen by 33 per cent in terms of the number of houses built. This means it takes more workers more time to build a house than it did two decades ago. We are getting worse at building homes. If you want to know why we have a housing affordability crisis, part of the explanation lies in this figure.
  • Let's not forget that one of the very first acts of this government when elected in 2022 was to abolish the sole industrial umpire in the sector, the Australian Building and Construction Commission, the ABCC. Since that time, the unchecked, militant, unlawful and intimidatory tactics of the CFMEU and other emboldened construction unions have added an estimated 30 per cent to construction costs in Australia over the last three years. That's a tax that we all pay. It's a tax that our state governments have to pay if they're undertaking major infrastructure projects, but it's also a tax we all pay if we're seeking to renovate our home or buy a new home.
  • One of the most troubling figures to emerge in recent days -- which, I think, spells out the economic malaise we're in -- is that, today, more than 50 per cent of Australians rely on government for their main income, whether it's through public sector wages, social security benefits or subsidies. This is because we have seen government spending surge, going from 24 per cent of GDP to 27 per cent of GDP in just a few years. That's a figure that was last seen in the early 1980s, and there is no end in sight. This is strangling the private sector and increasingly turning Australia into a mendicant society, one that depends on government spending for its livelihood.
  • This government has now announced an Economic Reform Roundtable to take place in the third week of August. This is a welcome recognition, at least, that the Australian economy is in poor health and that we have an urgent need to address its ailments. Hopefully, it means the era of denial is over. But this summit has to be more than a ritualistic or formulaic exercise. It must deliver outcomes.
  • But you cannot say that the initial signs are promising. We've had the Prime Minister and the Treasurer rule out industrial relations changes. We've had the Prime Minister and the Treasurer effectively rule out any ambitious tax reform. We've had government ministers talk about giving unions a right of veto over the deployment of productive technology in the workplace. We've got trade unions having been given four out of the 24 spots available at this Economic Reform Roundtable.
  • One of the demands from the ACTU and trade unions -- these are the people who will occupy almost 20 per cent of the seats at this roundtable -- is to abolish the Productivity Commission. That's right: abolish the professional, independent, expert body that advises the government on how to improve productivity. The union suggestion is that this body should be abolished as a way to somehow improve our productivity. Another of their demands is to give trade unions a veto over the deployment and use of artificial intelligence in the workplace. Their final demand is a shorter working week, not offset by productivity increases, by increased workplace flexibility or by the deployment of new technologies -- just a shorter working week.
  • It doesn't augur well, and it has echoes of the Jobs and Skills Summit in 2022, which was, as business frankly concedes now, a complete stitch-up. It was used as a vehicle by the government to pursue dramatic changes to our industrial relations system, which has taken us well back beyond the era of Paul Keating. It's basically destroyed the system of enterprise bargaining that he helped introduce, and it's destroyed the very notion that workers in an enterprise can negotiate with their employer and trade off flexibility or productivity for material wage gains or better working conditions.
  • I want to turn briefly to competition, because competition is an area that must be addressed by this roundtable. Australia is being held back in too many sectors by weak competition. A lack of competition in these sectors is hurting not only the workers in those sectors, who are not able to sell their labour more effectively to other bidders, but also consumers. We have welcomed the government's work through the competition taskforce, and we remain ready to support important competition reforms.
  • But what have we seen on the government's agenda? Well, one of their first acts last week in the parliament was to seek to enshrine penalty rates in law, remove flexibility and make it more difficult for workers to negotiate higher rates of base pay by offsetting penalty rates -- something that many workers have pursued over the years. We've also seen ministers talk about giving unions a veto over the deployment of artificial intelligence. And, again, the only area of tax reform the government seems to be pursuing is a novel, untested and, frankly, nightmarish tax on unrealised gains in super accounts, something that has never been done before in Australia, which will almost certainly act not only as a tax on those individuals who have self-managed super funds with balances above the amount but a tax on early-stage investment.
  • We will hold this government to account for its big talk on productivity and economic growth. Australia is a great and prosperous nation not by chance but by choice. Our economic success has been built on hard work, on economic liberalism and on reward for effort. But weak productivity, a lack of competition and anaemic growth are all major challenges for Australia, and we cannot afford to sit by or think we can regulate or tax our way to prosperity. If we want to remain a high-income, high-opportunity country, we need to get serious about economic reform. That means less red tape, more competition and greater innovation so that we can restore our economic strength and leave the country in better shape for our children.
• Smith, Sen Marielle, South Australia, ALP, 13:25, page 49 [9]
  • South Australia 13:25 () (): I also rise to make a contribution to this debate. But, before I do, I absolutely need to thank and acknowledge the good people of South Australia for returning me to serve another six-year term, alongside all my fellow South Australian senators who were also re-elected, and I acknowledge Senator Antic, in the chamber, as one of them. I know it is absolutely the privilege of all of our lives to serve in this place. There's a deep level of trust placed in us by the people of our state, the greatest state in Australia, to do our job here, and I really want to recognise that. Oh, sorry! Senator Blyth, as well, is one of our South Australian senators representing that great state. So thank you, South Australians, for that privilege that you have bestowed upon us.
  • Throughout the campaign, my greatest hope was that the election would return an Albanese Labor government so that we could continue all the work we started last term. But my second greatest hope during the election campaign was to find myself with a new local member of parliament. The newly elected member for Sturt, Ms Claire Clutterham MP, is the first Labor MP in 53 years to serve in that seat and the first woman ever to be the local representative in that role. The member for Sturt worked extraordinarily hard during that campaign. She will be a fantastic addition to the federal parliament. I know she will make a great contribution. I also acknowledge Mr James Stevens for his service over six years as the previous member for Sturt.
  • There were many volunteers from our movement who contributed to the history-making result in Sturt and I want to thank and acknowledge all of them, including my friend Jason Byrne, who made a remarkable contribution to that effort. But there were many, many people who did, and I acknowledge all of them, too.
  • I also want to thank the Australian Electoral Commission and acknowledge the role that they played in the 2025 election campaign. Our democracy is the envy of the world, and our Electoral Commission deserves so much credit for that. We are extremely lucky to live in a country where we can take for granted the fact that we will have fairly conducted election campaigns, free of corruption and interference, and the AEC are the custodians of that. The people who work for the AEC do extraordinary work, over very, very long hours and often in trying circumstances. I do want to acknowledge their work and their contribution in the conduct of our recent federal election.
  • We took many commitments to the Australian people this federal election, but I think it is fair to say that the most significant of those commitments we took was about our healthcare system -- the future of Medicare, and how we choose to invest in health care, how we choose to prioritise health care, and especially how we choose to invest in and prioritise women's health. I've been advocating for greater investment in women's health since the start of my parliamentary career, because you simply do not have to look very far to see the instances where women's voices have gone unheard, where women have felt silenced, and where women have not received the support and care they need when it comes to their health care. I am deeply proud of the position we took to this election campaign -- our investment of some $800 million in women's health, including new medicines on the PBS for the first time in decades; new contraceptive pills on the PBS for the first time in decades; new hormone replacement therapy on the PBS for the first time in decades. We're also making substantial investments in men's health, too, which I'll come to later in my speech.
  • But health care, I think, was the defining policy question in our election campaign and it will be the defining work of all of us as we continue our term. There are few things more important -- really, is there anything more important? -- to Australian families than their health and the health of the people they love. And we know that we need to improve primary care in this country. We need to improve and invest more in the Medicare system in this country.
  • We are the pride of the world when it comes to our healthcare system, but it was systematically undermined by the previous government's previous prime ministers -- I can't remember how many there were. We need to turn that around and make much greater investments in our healthcare system. Women's health is a significant part of that.
  • ( Senator Chandler ): Order! Senator Smith, you'll be in continuation when debate resumes on the address-in-reply. It being 1.30, it's time for two-minute statements.
  • Interjection / Chandler, Sen Claire (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Tasmania, LP, page 50

• Sex Discrimination Amendment (Restoring Biological Definitions) Bill 2025 / Antic, Sen Alex, South Australia, LP, 13:30, page 50 2 min [4]
  • South Australia 13:30 () (): This morning I attempted to introduce a bill to protect women's rights by amending the Sex Discrimination Act, by removing references to gender identity and restoring the act to its original purpose, which was to prevent discrimination on the basis of biological sex. That attempt was thwarted by Labor and the Greens, who opposed the bill's introduction. That's right: Labor and the Greens don't even want to discuss the issue of protecting women's spaces.
  • What that bill sought to do was to restore the Sex Discrimination Act to the position it was in in 2013, when there was a prescriptive definition of 'man' and 'woman', before the Gillard government introduced the concept of 'gender identity' into the act as a protected attribute. This change has had what, arguably, may have been unintended consequences, in creating a situation where the safety, privacy and opportunities of women are now threatened under the very law that was designed to protect them. But Labor and the Greens don't care.
  • Sex is not a social construct. It's a core biological reality that underpins human nature and the protections that this act was meant to provide. But, today, 'discrimination' on the basis of the concept of gender identity has become unlawful, placing Australians under legal threat for not affirming a concept that they may actually fundamentally disagree with. Now, if some of the people in this building actually cared about those who suffer from gender dysphoria, we'd be talking about this in a truthful manner. But that is not what happened today.
  • I want to take the opportunity, however, to thank the coalition, the opposition, for pushing the bill through for at least a second reading -- they voted in favour of it -- and also Senator Canavan, who co-sponsored the motion this morning. This battle is not over.
• Tertiary Education / Stewart, Sen Jana, Victoria, ALP, 13:32, page 50 2 min [5]
  • Victoria 13:32 () (): The Department of Education estimates that around 62,000 First Nations students with a student loan debt will benefit from the reduction of 20 per cent that passed the Senate earlier today. This is a powerful reminder of how economic justice and educational equity must go hand in hand.
  • I know well the transformative power of tertiary education -- how it can unlock doors and illuminate pathways. In 2008, I began my own journey with university education while working full time. I was the first person in my family to attend university. For my family, tertiary education wasn't a viable option. There were many reasons for this, but financial barriers were definitely a significant reason.
  • That's why I'm proud that Labor is cutting student loan debts by 20 per cent. But this is not simply about easing individual pressure; it is about building a stronger, smarter and more productive future for our nation. The jobs of the future will demand more specialised skills, more training and greater adaptability. Without equitable access to tertiary education, we risk leaving too many Australians behind and our economy without the skilled workforce that it needs. Labor is building a better, fairer system -- one that ensures all Australians, regardless of background or postcode, can access the opportunities that education provides.
  • These reforms sit alongside our broader cost-of-living measures, which also came into effect on 1 July. From tax cuts for every Australian taxpayer to increased rent assistance and expanded energy rebates, Labor is easing pressure on all households in a targeted and responsible way. These cost-of-living measures ease the day-to-day pressure so students can focus on study and not just on survival.
  • For people wondering why we should support this whether we have a student loan debt or not, it's because the benefits flow beyond just the graduate. They flow into our communities, through our hospitals, our schools and our economy. Every teacher, nurse, engineer or social worker trained in our universities strengthens our communities and our country.
• Middle East / Hodgins-May, Sen Steph, Victoria, AG, 13:34, page 50 2 min [14]
  • HODGINS-MAY Victoria 13:34 () (): Today I would like to read out a statement from Jewish Voices for Humanity, a group from my home city of Naarm/Melbourne:
  • We are Jewish Victorians deeply concerned about Israel's systematic oppression of Palestinians, culminating in the current genocide and forced starvation in Gaza.
  • Many of us are descendants of Holocaust survivors; all of us carry its legacy. We understand genocide. What Israel is doing in Palestine -- mass killing, starvation and displacement, destruction of civilian infrastructure, and denial of aid -- is indefensible. These are crimes against humanity and genocide.
  • "Never Again" is a core Jewish value born of the Holocaust. It must apply to everyone. Never Again is Never Again for anyone.
  • Standing up for Palestinian rights is not antisemitic. We believe Palestinian safety is inextricably linked to our own.
  • We reject the conflation of antisemitism with criticism of Israel and Zionism.
  • The weaponisation of antisemitism is dangerous, whether through stifling support for Palestinians or critique of Israel. Genuine antisemitism must be addressed alongside all other forms of racism. True safety will only come from justice, and a society where everyone has equal Rights. A just resolution and equal rights for Palestinians are cornerstones of social cohesion.
  • We call on the Australian government to ACT NOW to stop the genocide in Gaza. Words are not enough.
  • We must:
  • Demand that UN agencies and humanitarian organisations be granted full, unhindered access to provide aid in Gaza.
  • Fulfil our obligations under the Genocide Convention to prevent and punish genocide.
  • Impose military, trade and economic sanctions on Israel.
  • Listen to Palestinian voices and follow their lead in building a future of shared dignity, safety, and freedom.
  • There is much more Australia can and must do. As Jews, as your constituents, with all our hearts we urge you: don't turn away. Act now ... If we don't act, we leave a terrible legacy for future generations, and history will judge us harshly.
• Forestry Industry / Cadell, Sen Ross, New South Wales, NATS, 13:36, page 51 2 min [4]
  • New South Wales Nationals Whip in the Senate 13:36 ( -- ) (): One of the shadow portfolios I have the great honour to hold is forestry. On 19 August, before we come back, it will be National Forestry Day. I also note that I have the privilege of serving with my great friend from the other side Senator Raff Ciccone as the co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Forestry, Timber and Paper Products.
  • This speech is a two-minute speech, there are two minutes allocated to it. The reason that's important to forestry is this: with the Australian forest holdings, every two minutes enough timber is grown to build a house. So, in the two minutes that I am talking in this speech, all of the Australian plantations and forests will grow enough in volume to build an entire house. That happens all the time.
  • I had a great fun time going up to the Hyne Timber Tuan Mill near Maryborough in Queensland and seeing the care and pride they take in producing the timber. It was way more than I thought. It's not a Monty Python skit with lumberjacks walking around. These guys process and scan through the wood. They test for flexibility. Each individual plank, each individual length that comes out, is guided for quality control. They want to minimise waste. They want to get that out here because they know that every tree that they are processing and every piece of wood that they're doing is taking carbon out of the air. It is a truly green building product from these plantations. They take all this carbon, they make the trees, they put that out and it's replaced -- another house every two minutes.
  • Our forest industry is a great one. Our forest industry means that we aren't taking other timbers from such places as Borneo or the Congo. These things are here. Our people that work in these industries are great. So, on 19 August, I want to celebrate all the workers and all the people up there. We had Joe the GM, David the plant manager and James Hyne, whose name appears on the Hyne Timber sign. They are all out there working in an Australian industry that would be replaced by things that happen worse overseas than they do in Australia. They build a quality product, and I want to support them all.
• Community Services / Cox, Sen Dorinda, Western Australia, ALP, 13:38, page 51 2 min [3]
  • Western Australia 13:38 () (): I would like to firstly acknowledge the Minister for Social Services for her own commitment and her team's work to supporting all Australians, especially in my home state, Western Australia. Labor is investing $150 million each year over the next five years through financial wellbeing and capability activity grants. These will provide free and confidential services, information, advice and advocacy to support vulnerable Australians and their loved ones to manage financial crisis, stress and hardship and to improve long-term financial wellbeing.
  • In my state, there were 25 organisations that were awarded these grants. These services provide meals, accommodation and other daily needs and essentials. We know that these grants have been awarded to organisations to support Western Australians that are doing it tough. Emergency relief is the last resort for many of them. It supports Australians to get back on their feet. No-one wants to have to ask for help, but these organisations allow people to do that with dignity through wraparound support -- sometimes just to have a cup of tea and an understanding ear right there available.
  • I've heard firsthand from some of my constituents that having a safe and non-judgemental place to go helps lessen the shame they sometimes feel. The next round, in 2025-26, will provide further support for people, from pre-crisis and early intervention to financial response, recovery and resilience. It is, again, the Albanese Labor government's commitment to continue supporting these organisations through these wonderful grants and providing vital services to our most vulnerable Australians. I thank the minister and her staff -- her office -- for supporting my electorate in Western Australia.
• Homelessness / Pocock, Sen David, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 13:40, page 52 2 min [2]
  • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 13:40 ( -- ) (): Parliamentarians back in the nation's capital may have noticed a couple of things over the last two weeks which they may have found a bit disturbing: not just how cold it's been, with a couple of apparent minus nines here in the nation's capital, but also the growing number of people sleeping rough in Canberra -- the growing homelessness in the national capital. Homelessness Australia says the number of people accessing homelessness services has increased by 10 per cent since 2022. Meanwhile, the number of social housing homes as a percentage of all housing has decreased here in the ACT. There are more than 3,100 people waiting for access to safe and affordable housing. Average wait times for those on the priority list exceed seven months. For others, it's more than five years wait.
  • As a wealthy country, we need to be doing so much better than this. Labor's investments over the last term are welcome but aren't rolling out fast enough. The latest update from Housing Australia shows that more than 5,500 dwellings from the first round of HAFF, announced in September last year, still don't have funding agreements. What is going on here? Why is it to slow? Round 2 closed in January, but successful projects are yet to be announced, and round 3 still hasn't opened. And there's no sign of the promised National Housing and Homelessness Plan. It's not good enough. We need to see far more urgency. Even take the CSIRO Ginninderra site, a sale between two Labor governments. They can't even do that in three years. Australians expect better, and I think they deserve better when it comes to housing in this country. I would urge the Albanese government to actually start delivering on this.
• Metals Industry / McDonald, Sen Susan, Queensland, LNP, 13:42, page 52 2 min [3]
  • Queensland 13:42 () (): Labor talk about a future made in Australia, but under their watch it's quickly turning into a nightmare made in Australia, especially for the metals manufacturing sector and for northern Australia. We are staring down the barrel of losing Glencore's copper smelter in Mount Isa and the refinery in Townsville. These aren't just facilities; they are the economic backbone of the region. Seventeen thousand jobs directly or indirectly depend on them. That's 17,000 families buying from local businesses, sending kids to local schools and holding entire towns together. We saw what happened when the Yabulu Nickel Refinery closed in 2016. Townsville still bears the scar.
  • This is a national interest issue. Copper is essential, from houses to smartphones to defence hardware, but, instead of strengthening our sovereign capability, Labor is letting it slip away while China opens new copper smelters and even Glencore is investing in a new copper smelter process in Riyadh, using the Glencore technology from Mount Isa.
  • Let's be clear: Mount Isa is not just a dot on the map. It's a strategic hub for defence, for biosecurity, for regional health care, for Indigenous services and for the development of the North West Minerals Province. When Mount Isa falters, so does northern Australia, and, when northern Australia falters, the whole nation pays the price. This government has poured billions of dollars into failed green hydrogen schemes while allowing our lucrative nickel industry to leave and the copper sector to falter. Labor has always had the wrong priorities, and it's always the regions that cop it in the neck when Labor's in office. Labor need to wake up because, if they don't step in and support copper and critical minerals processing in the north, there will be no future made in Australia; there'll only be a nightmare, and it'll have Labor's name all over it.
• Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme / Walker, Sen Charlotte, South Australia, ALP, 13:44, page 52 2 min [2]
  • South Australia 13:44 () (): I note that this is not my first speech. I want to speak about how important the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is to people living with medical conditions. This year, I was diagnosed with a genetic heart condition called familial hypercholesterolaemia, or FH. FH is an inherited condition that affects up to one in 250 Australians. When I was diagnosed with FH, I was told that, without regular medication, I could have a heart attack much younger than average. FH causes dangerously high cholesterol levels from birth. Without treatment it increases the risk of early heart disease by up to 20 times. In severe cases, children with undiagnosed FH can suffer heart attacks before they finish school. But here's the good news: with early diagnosis and regular access to cholesterol-lowering medication, people with FH can live long, healthy lives.
  • The medication I take each day is on the PBS. I must commend Minister Butler for our government's policy to reduce the PBS co-payment to a maximum of $25 from 1 January next year. This policy is a lifeline for every Australian needing medication but particularly for those of us with medical conditions. To put this into perspective, the Australia Institute's research shows that my medication can cost more than $2,000 in the United States if you do not have private health insurance. This change to the PBS will strengthen our healthcare system and relieve the cost of living. This reform is practical and compassionate, and this reform is necessary for Aussies like me who rely on medication every single day.
• Middle East / Pocock, Sen Barbara, South Australia, AG, 13:46, page 53 1 min [2]
  • South Australia 13:46 () (): I rise to speak about the forced mass starvation and ongoing genocide in Gaza. Israel has killed over 60,000 Palestinians since October 2023, but the number is likely much higher. Just this week, we received a petition with the names of 17,000 children who have been murdered in Gaza. It's utterly heartbreaking. Over 1,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli soldiers while trying to get the food they need to survive. It's undeniable that Israel is using mass starvation to kill the people of Gaza. There have been at least 147 deaths to date directly attributed to starvation. Most of them were children or infants. My heart breaks for every single one.
  • Yesterday the Senate passed a motion condemning Israel's aid blockade. It recognised that, without aid, millions of Palestinians risk being plunged further into catastrophic hunger and mass death. This government agrees that Israel is breaching international law, but now it's time to act. For too long, the Albanese government has refused to end our complicity in this genocide. This government has failed to sanction the Israeli security cabinet, which is responsible for carrying out the genocide in Gaza and for the illegal occupation of the West Bank. The Albanese government must impose a sanctions regime against Israel, just as it has done for Russia, for the illegal invasion of Ukraine. We must act in the face of this genocide. Australia needs to sanction Israel, end the two-way arms trade and cut off any funding for the genocide. We won't stop until Palestine is free.
• Education Standards / Payman, Sen Fatima, Western Australia, AV, 13:47, page 53 2 min [2]
  • Western Australia Australia's Voice Whip 13:47 ( -- ) (): I was extremely concerned to read this week that WA's NAPLAN results were amongst the worst in the country, with 40 per cent of year 3 students below the reading benchmark and 38.5 per cent below the numeracy benchmark. According to the Grattan Institute's Amy Haywood, that's at least 46,000 students across WA that are not on track. That's not just a number; that's thousands of futures at risk. In these foundational years, falling behind can impact a child's entire educational journey. It seems trite to say, but children are our future, and, if we really mean that, then we need to start acting like it. WA classrooms are under immense pressure, and teachers are stretched, trying to cater to kids with complex needs and behavioural challenges, all while managing large classroom sizes. Victoria averages one teacher for 20 students, while WA teachers face 27.
  • The funding of schools by the state government is hampered by WA's limited share of GST revenue. Despite WA's economy carrying the eastern states on its back, we are left behind when it comes to divvying up the GST. A larger share of the revenue would mean more money for the state government to put into our schools. Then we have the Commonwealth's share of the school resourcing standard. The government has, commendably, committed to fully funding public schools across Australia by 2034 -- by 2034! That's in 10 years time. The kids in year 3 today will have graduated before this promise is fulfilled. That's not good enough. Western Australians deserve better, WA families deserve better and WA children, especially those falling behind, deserve a fair go now, not in 10 years.
• Economy / Sharma, Sen Dave, New South Wales, LP, 13:49, page 53 3 min [3]
  • New South Wales 13:49 () (): Earlier today my colleague Senator Bragg proposed the establishment of a select committee to look into productivity in Australia. This committee would have included members of the government and the opposition, it would have been wide ranging and far reaching, and it would have examined what the government itself concedes is a profound national challenge facing Australia, which is the collapse in our productivity. Productivity levels in Australia are currently sitting at 2016 levels. Unless we get productivity growing again, we have no hope of improving living standards, we have no hope of modernising and re-equipping our Defence Force, we have no hope of upgrading our infrastructure and we have no hope of continuing to fund generous social services or look after the needy in our community.
  • That's why this side of the chamber, the coalition, has welcomed the government's Economic Reform Roundtable, to be held later next month, and we will be participating in it in good faith. But, I have to say, the early signs are not good. We have had the Prime Minister and now the Treasurer rule out industrial relations reform. We've had them rule out substantive tax reform. We've had them give trade unions one in five seats at the productivity roundtable, and one of the signature suggestions of the trade unions for this roundtable is to abolish the Productivity Commission. The trade unions want to abolish the professional, expert, independent body that is advising the government on how to improve productivity.
  • That is why I was so genuinely disappointed to see that Senator Bragg's motion was not supported. This is an opportunity for bipartisanship. This is an opportunity for us all to recognise that productivity faces profound national challenges. Senator Bragg's motion was an opportunity for the parliament to address this issue, and that is why the government's opposition to it was so disappointing.
• Migration / Roberts, Sen Malcolm, Queensland, PHON, 13:52, page 54 2 min [3]
  • Queensland 13:52 () (): Not counting tourists, the number of people in Australia today who are not Australian citizens could be as high as 3.7 million. In a country with an estimated population of just 27.4 million people, this huge influx is stretching our hospitals, making housing unaffordable and making life more expensive.
  • Noncitizens must have a visa to be in Australia. These are split into two categories: permanent residency visas and temporary visas. The latest data from the Department of Home Affairs shows that, excluding the 320,000 tourist and crew visas, there are currently 2.5 million people in Australia on temporary visas. The data on permanent residency visas is not clear; it's murky. Between 2000 and 2021, three million permanent residency visas were issued to permanent migrants. In 2023, it was estimated that 59 per cent of those three million permanent visa holders have become Australian citizens. As of 2021, that would leave 1.2 million people who have not become citizens and are still on permanent visas, plus any more permanent residents who've arrived since 2021. Adding that best estimate of permanent visa holders to the 2.5 million people on temporary visas, we get 3.7 million people who are potentially in the country on visas.
  • So what's the real number? How many people are currently in Australia on a permanent visa, and why won't the government tell Australians? Is it just too embarrassing for the government, after they promised to reduce immigration, to admit how many people in Australia aren't Australian citizens? My new One Nation colleague Senator Tyron Whitten, Senator for Western Australia, will be asking the government about this number in question time today. In the middle of a housing crisis, the government had better know how many additional people it is letting into our country, undermining our standard of living and way of life.
• Asylum Seekers / Shoebridge, Sen David, New South Wales, AG, 13:54, page 54 1 min [5]
  • New South Wales 13:54 () (): This week I was lucky enough to meet with an ASRC delegation of people subjected to the cruel fast-track process. Narges and her son Nooshad arrived in Australia in 2013, seeking safety from the regime in Iran. Narges is an NDIS support worker, and Nooshad works in IT. Nooshad lives with cerebral palsy and, because of the fast-track process, remains unable to access the disability support that he needs to find work. They told me, 'We've been doing our best for 13 years, but we just want to be able to call Australia home.'
  • I also met union organiser Thanu. After arriving alone in Australia at just 19 years of age and being stuck in a limbo with no work rights, Thanu has built a life for himself against all odds. He has elderly parents whom he hasn't seen for years. He's prevented from seeing them, from holding them and from making human connections.
  • Also in the delegation was Rathy. I've had the pleasure of meeting Rathy many times. She's a proud Tamil refugee woman, a grassroots organiser and a mum of two daughters. One was born in Australia, with all the rights that comes with that. She's now a happy 11-year-old and an Australian citizen. The other, her older sister who arrived as a toddler, is now 16 years old. After 13 years, the risk of separation is a real threat to this family. Rathy's older daughter doesn't even know if she will be able to go to uni. She told me:
  • For more than a decade, we have been trapped in this so-called Fast Track process but nothing about it has been fast. We are left in limbo, waiting, suffering, forgotten. We are not living, we are just surviving. We've lost years, we've lost loved ones, we've lost pieces of ourselves. All we want is a chance to live with dignity, to rebuild, to be free.
  • How many more lives will be tarnished by this cruel system? Australia is their home. Enough is enough. Let's give them permanency and that home now.
• Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme / Tyrrell, Sen Tammy, Tasmania, IND, 13:55, page 54 2 min [3]
  • Tasmania Independent TAS Whip 13:55 ( -- ) (): Congratulations to Labor! They're patting themselves on the back for doing the bare minimum for Tassie farmers and producers. It's official: Tassie businesses can now get 25 per cent more money back on claims made under the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme. Don't get me wrong; it's a win. Twelve months ago, no-one in this chamber was talking about this broken scheme at all. I'm really proud that the Senate Select Committee on the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme has led to the first pay increase for Tassie businesses in years, but it doesn't even scratch the surface of fixing this completely broken system. A system set up to make things fairer for Tassie businesses is sending them backwards instead.
  • We know that changes are needed, but, instead of getting on with it, Labor wants to do another review. The funny thing about reviews is that they're not a promise to change anything. Labor doesn't have to act on any of the recommendations; all it will do is kick the can further down the road. We're in a cost-of-living crisis. Tasmanians need help now, not in three years time when there's another election Labor wants to win.
  • If Labor don't have any ideas, that's okay. I've put forward things that can be done right now to improve the scheme. The scheme needs to be faster, cheaper and easier to use. Payments need to get to businesses quicker, and the whole scheme should be modernised. Air freight should be included; it would be a game changer for King Island and Flinders Island. We need staff actually on the ground in Tasmania to help people use the system that is supposed to help them. The scheme should only sit under one government department, not two. Having two departments means less accountability and transparency. We can fix that. These changes could happen today if Labor wanted. It's time for real action on this freight scheme, not empty promises.
• Housing / Dolega, Sen Josh, Tasmania, ALP, 13:57, page 55 [3]
  • Tasmania 13:57 () (): Community houses truly are the heart of our communities. Earlier this month, I had the privilege of meeting Tracy from the Burnie Community House. Tracy was very kind. She introduced me to her staff and their volunteers, so they could tell me about the amazing work that they do for the local community. From the community kitchen to the veggie co-op, I was inspired by the passion and dedication that Tracy and her team bring to their work. What I witnessed wasn't just a service; it was a movement of care, inclusion and connection. The Burnie Community House is on the front line, supporting people of all walks of life and, can I say, more often than not supporting some of the most vulnerable people in the community.
  • Community houses like the one in Burnie are doing more than offering programs; they are creating safe spaces where people feel seen, heard and valued. They're helping adults and kids build confidence to learn new skills and find pathways to employment and education. And, perhaps most importantly, they're weaving together the social fabric that brings people together and holds our community strong.
  • In a time when isolation and disconnection are growing challenges, the work of neighbourhood houses is more vital than ever. They remind us that the community isn't just about geography; it's about relationships, and it's about support and shared purpose. What I saw in the Burnie Community House was a team who cared. They wanted to do everything they could to support their local community, and I commend them for the work that they do. When we support community connection, we can build a future that's inclusive, resilient and full of hope. I look forward to visiting more community houses in Tasmania over the coming months.

• Defence 7 min [6]
  • Collins, Sen Jessica, New South Wales, LP, 14:00, page 55 / New South Wales Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 14:00 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Penny Wong. As I joined Australian diggers conducting Exercise Talisman Sabre this month, the Netherlands joined a growing list of countries calling on Australia to increase our defence spending. But, as I said last night, if Australia's political leadership were completely honest with the Australian people, the case for increasing defence spending would be a no-brainer. In 2022, the Albanese government said it would set targets on raising defence spending as a proportion of GDP. The government has since backflipped on this commitment. Minister, why was an increased GDP target a good idea in 2022 but a bad idea now, given that global challenges have only worsened? 3 min
  • Collins, Sen Jessica, New South Wales, LP, 14:03, page 56 2 min [3]
    • New South Wales Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 14:03 ( -- ) (): It takes an appreciation of the Australian Defence Force to understand the pressures our men and women in uniform face and the sacrifices they make for our country. Minister, is it correct that the Prime Minister has never attended and participated in an Australian military exercise?
    • Seriously?
    • Interjection / Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, page 56
  • Collins, Sen Jessica, New South Wales, LP, 14:05, page 56 / New South Wales Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 14:05 ( -- ) (): While the Prime Minister spent six days in China visiting tourist sites to pay homage to past Labor leaders, he missed our biggest and most significant joint military exercise. Why didn't the Prime Minister visit our troops at Talisman Sabre when he did make time to visit People's Liberation Army officers in China? Why does the Prime Minister think national security, defence and meeting our allies is somebody else's job?
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:01, page 55 2 min [13]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:01 ( -- ) (): First can I acknowledge the first question from Senator Collins and congratulate her on her first speech yesterday. Can I say to her -- she would be aware, I would assume -- that we have increased defence spending over the forward estimates and over the decade: an additional $10.6 billion over the forwards, and $56.7 billion over the decade.
    • As the Prime Minister has made clear, we fund capability. We are very conscious that the first responsibility of a government is to ensure we keep our people safe and keep our nation safe. Critical to that -- and central to that -- is ensuring Defence has the capability required to deal with these uncertain times. That is why we have increased defence funding to record levels -- the biggest peacetime increase in Australia's history.
    • I would also make the point -- and the senator was not part of the government which delivered this -- that what we saw under the previous government was a lot of press releases but very little capability. In fact, some 28 projects were running nearly a century behind schedule; the cumulative slippage in capability acquisition under the previous government was 97 years.
    • Opposition senators interjecting --
    • Order!
    • The senator is one of those who does understand the strategic circumstances Australia faces. She would also understand, given her deep knowledge of the Pacific, the importance of all arms of national power --
    • Senator Henderson, I've called the chamber to order!
    • being directed to Australia's national security. Defence is first amongst those, but there's also diplomacy and economic engagement, and she described it as a form of integration with the --
    • She?
    • (Time expired) Sorry, the Senator described it as a form of integration --
    • Senator Collins, first supplementary?
    • Interjection [4]
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 56
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 56
      • Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, page 56
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 56
    • Continue [3]
      • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 56
      • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 56
      • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 56
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:03, page 56 3 min [8]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:03 ( -- ) (): It's a disappointing question from a senator who I think actually has --
    • Cash: If you don't like it --
    • Well, it is -- from a senator who I think does have an appreciation of the importance of the role of the ADF --
    • Order! Order! Senator Watt, I've called order!
    • (Time expired) It's disappointing, because I held her in regard. What I would say -- through you, President -- to the Senator, is that the Prime Minister absolutely understands what the men and women of the ADF do for our country. I think she may have been, amongst others, at the ceremony at the War Memorial where the Prime Minister, as always, spoke. He spoke about the importance of service and the debt of gratitude all of us owe all those who serve. I would also say that I had the privilege over the weekend of standing with service women from three countries, three services --
    • Senator Collins, second supplementary?
    • Interjection [3]
      • Cash, Sen Michaelia, Western Australia, LP, page 56
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 56
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 56
    • Continue [2]
      • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 56
      • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 56
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:06, page 56 [5]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:06 ( -- ) (): First, in relation to Talisman Sabre, senators may have seen that we had a UK led carrier strike group with the largest warship in the British navy, which the defence minister and I visited with our counterparts. What I was saying when I was speaking earlier was that I had the privilege of speaking with the men and women of three countries and three services who were participating in Talisman Sabre --
    • She's not asking about you; it's got nothing to do with you.
    • (Time expired) Senator Ruston, maybe you could show them some respect. That matters. President, through you: to Senator Collins, she would understand that China is a great power in our region and we need to engage. That is not to diminish any other relationship. We know who our strategic partner is; it is the United States. But I think those opposite have not learned from the Dutton era, have they?
    • Interjection / Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, page 56
    • Continue / Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 56
• Cybersafety 6 min [6]
  • Stewart, Sen Jana, Victoria, ALP, 14:07, page 56 / Victoria 14:07 () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. The Albanese Labor government's focus since being returned to office has been on delivering on its commitments to the Australian people. Why is it important that government delivers on its commitments and how is the Albanese Labor government delivering on its commitment to protect young Australians from the harms of social media? 2 min
  • Stewart, Sen Jana, Victoria, ALP, 14:09, page 57 / Victoria 14:09 () (): During our first term, the Albanese Labor government also delivered on our commitment to make medicines cheaper, cutting the maximum price of a PBS listed script from $42.50 to $30. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to deliver on our commitment to make medicines even cheaper for Australians? 2 min
  • Stewart, Sen Jana, Victoria, ALP, 14:11, page 57 / Victoria 14:11 () (): In November last year, the Prime Minister announced a commitment that a re-elected Albanese Labor government would cut student debt by 20 per cent. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering on this commitment, and what does this mean for people struggling with student debt?
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:07, page 56 3 min [5]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:07 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Stewart for the excellent question. As she references, the Prime Minister did announce last year that our government would legislate 16 years of age as the minimum age for access to social media. This week, the Minister for Communications has tabled the rules for these world-leading minimum age social media laws. Starting from 10 December 2025, we will require social media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent Australians under the age of 16 from creating a social media account.
    • Following advice from the eSafety Commissioner and broad consultation, Minister Wells also outlined which types of online services would be excluded from the legislation, including health and education messaging apps as well as games. Most importantly, we are placing the burden of action on social media platforms, not just on parents or young people. I have heard some criticism from some in this place about this policy framework and I would say this: it is true that there is no solution which is perfect when it comes to keeping our young people safe online, but minimum age social media laws will make a meaningful difference. They are also the right thing to do.
    • The online environment can be dangerous and these laws are about giving parents and carers additional support -- and I'm sure many parents relate to this challenge -- to help ensure that children won't feel isolated or excluded for not being on social media, because their friends and classmates will not be on it either. Building Australia's future includes doing all that we can to give the next generation of Australians the best shot at life. It means looking after the next generation. The Albanese government is delivering on that commitment.
    • Senator Stewart, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 57
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:10, page 57 1 min [4]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:10 ( -- ) (): As you would know, Senator Stewart, when we came to government in 2022, about a million Australians were not filling their prescriptions, because they could not afford them. They weren't filling their prescriptions, because they couldn't afford them. This was the situation when those opposite were in government. So we delivered the largest cut to the price of PBS medicines in the history of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, cutting the maximum price from $42.50 to $30, and freezing the price at $7.70 per script for concession card holders and pensioners.
    • (Time expired) Now, colleagues, do we remember what the coalition did when faced with the opportunity to help Australians afford their medicine? Can we remember what they did when cheaper medicines came before this chamber? They voted against it. They voted against cheaper medicine. They voted against more money in Australians' pockets. We on this side will not be deterred. This week we are going further --
    • Senator Stewart, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 57
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:11, page 57 [7]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:11 ( -- ) (): As the senator would know and as colleagues would know, last year the Prime Minister came to South Australia, to the electorate of Sturt, and announced that a re-elected Labor government would cut student debts by 20 per cent. We promised that this would be the first thing we would do when we were back in parliament, and that is exactly what this team has done. That's exactly what we have done, because we understand that getting an education shouldn't mean a lifetime of debt. Three million Australians are getting a 20 per cent cut to student debt, and millions more will benefit from our changes to the repayment threshold so that Australians can earn more before they start paying off their debt. This is on top of our policy last term to cap indexation.
    • Whilst we are cutting student debt, what are they doing? When this vote came on in the chamber, they were so divided they couldn't even bring themselves to vote. They couldn't even --
    • A point of order on misleading the Senate. Labor did not cap indexation.
    • Senator Henderson, that's a debating point, and you know that very well.
    • (Time expired) Whilst we are cutting student debt, you can't even bring yourselves to vote on it.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Henderson, Sen Sarah, Victoria, LP, page 57
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 57
    • Continue / Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 57
• Closing The Gap 6 min [6]
  • Liddle, Sen Kerrynne, South Australia, LP, 14:13, page 57 / South Australia 14:13 Closing the g ap () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Minister, the latest report shows that only four of the 19 targets are on track, and critical outcomes like incarceration, suicide and child removal are going backwards. How can your government continue to claim to be delivering outcomes for Indigenous Australians when your government's own report is damning and shows you are failing them? 2 min
  • Liddle, Sen Kerrynne, South Australia, LP, 14:15, page 58 / South Australia 14:15 () (): Thank you, Minister Wong. Of course we need to do better. Why does this government continue to talk about listening and reform when the reality is that, under Labor, since 2022, incarceration rates are rising -- up 3.5 per cent; Indigenous suicide rates are worsening -- up 9.4 per cent; and youth detention is up 11 per cent? Isn't this more proof that Labor governs with slogans, not substance? 3 min
  • Liddle, Sen Kerrynne, South Australia, LP, 14:18, page 58 / South Australia 14:18 Closing the g ap () (): The latest report also shows that the target to reduce overcrowding in Indigenous housing is also not on track. Since the Albanese government was elected in 2022, how many new additional homes have been funded by the Commonwealth for Indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory, and what is the net increase in housing supply in the Northern Territory?
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:13, page 58 3 min [5]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:13 ( -- ) (): Senator Liddle would be aware that the Productivity Commission report today updated on Closing the Gap. Obviously we are making progress in some areas and insufficient progress in others, and the government acknowledges that. I think you would have heard Minister McCarthy speaking about this publicly. Four targets are on track to be met. That is insufficient. Encouragingly, 10 targets are improving, and some states, like Victoria and South Australia, are making real progress. That is obviously good news. Unfortunately, the Northern Territory is not, and the report shows that in fact the Northern Territory is going backwards.
    • Obviously Closing the Gap is a long-term commitment. It's a commitment I hope that can continue to have bipartisan support. Obviously the minister is continuing to work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and the Coalition of Peaks to make a difference in the lives and life outcomes of Indigenous Australians.
    • (Time expired) As I said, we have four targets on track, including children enrolled in preschool, Indigenous employment, sea waters and land mass subject to legal rights and interests, all covered under Indigenous rights. But the targets that are improving, which do matter, are life expectancy, healthy birth weight, attainment of year 12, the completion of tertiary qualification, youth in employment, education or training, and Indigenous people living in appropriately sized housing. The really concerning ones are those not on track and worsening: early childhood, incarceration, which I know is something the chamber has been discussing, Indigenous children who are aged up to 17 held in out-of-home care, and Indigenous suicide rates. Obviously, as a country, we need to do better on those.
    • Senator Liddle, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 58
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:16, page 58 2 min [12]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:16 ( -- ) (): No. I don't agree with you, and I don't think any government of any political persuasion --
    • So the statistics are just wrong?
    • Senator Liddle, second supplementary?
    • Well, let's try this one. The evidence is there. The latest --
    • Sorry, Senator Wong. I thought you had --
    • No, I was sitting down because it would be good if, just on one issue, Senator Cash could show a modicum of bipartisanship.
    • I'm very sorry. I did not hear Senator Cash. Senator Liddle, I think the minister has more to add on your first supplementary. And there needs to be silence across the chamber.
    • Senator Liddle, I may not agree with every policy prescription you have, but I respect your commitment on these issues. What I would say to you -- and I think you know this -- is that no government of any political persuasion has delivered the sorts of outcomes on Closing the Gap targets that we would want, whether it's governments from your side of politics or ours, state or federal. We know that, and we have to do better.
    • (Time expired) I hope that, in this term, we see continued improvement on some of the targets that we are seeing now, and I hope the four targets you mentioned, which I was upfront about as worsening, are ones that we can turn around. We know that all of us -- this parliament and governments of all political persuasions at state, federal and territory levels -- have to work together to try and ensure we do better on these targets for --
    • Senator Liddle, second supplementary?
    • Interjection [7]
      • Cash, Sen Michaelia, Western Australia, LP, page 58
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 58
      • Liddle, Sen Kerrynne, South Australia, LP, page 58
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 58
      • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 58
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 58
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 58
    • Continue / Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 58
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:18, page 58 / South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:18 ( -- ) (): I will see if I can get more detail on the housing points and the specific issue of how much additional housing since we came to government in 2022. I would make the point that the information before me is that appropriately sized housing, which is target 9a, I think -- I have it listed as improving but not on track. So I will certainly get for you whatever additional information Senator McCarthy can provide in relation to that. Obviously that means we're not meeting the target, but I hope what my brief says to me is that it is improving from where it was.
• South Australia: Marine Environment 6 min [6]
  • Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, South Australia, AG, 14:19, page 59 / South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 14:19 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water, Senator Watt. The toxic algal bloom in South Australia has been wreaking havoc on our state -- on our fishing industry, our tourism industry and our community. Our beaches may be closed over summer. Our beaches are littered with dead fish, dolphins, seals and rays. Isn't it true, Minister, that, if this devastation were happening on Bondi Beach, you would have spent a bit longer than 11 minutes checking it out? 3 min
  • Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, South Australia, AG, 14:22, page 59 / HANSON-YOUNG South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 14:22 ( -- ) (): Well, $14 million is something, but it's been pretty slow coming and it's pretty minuscule. It's going to hardly touch the sides of what our state is going to need. Minister, when will you fix the rules -- as requested by the South Australian government themselves, the fishing industry and the community -- to declare this a national disaster, because that is what it is? 1 min
  • Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, South Australia, AG, 14:23, page 59 / South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 14:23 ( -- ) (): The algal bloom is yet another canary in the coalmine for climate change. Who will you make pay for the damage of this disaster? It's time that you made Santos and Woodside pay for the damage of their toxic fossil fuels. Will you make them pay?
  • Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, 14:19, page 59 3 min [5]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:19 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Hanson-Young. It is a shame that Senator Hanson-Young is so intent on playing politics with this very serious environmental event. The bit she left out of her question was the fact that when I visited Adelaide last week I announced $14 million in funding from the federal government to support the response to and recovery from the algal bloom. You forgot that little bit. But you're right: I did, while I was in Adelaide, take the opportunity to go and inspect one of the beaches with the member for Boothby, Louise Miller-Frost, who's been advocating very strongly on this issue for some time.
    • And I was also pleased to see, this week, Premier Malinauskas make further announcements about the joint federal-state response to this event, which included some of that funding, which will go not only towards supporting greater scientific research to understand the causes and effects of and responses to this event but also towards supporting the many businesses who are impacted by this event. I think we've all understood the damage that this event has caused, of course, to the marine environment, which is devastating, as I've said before. We've also seen the terrible impact that it's having on a range of businesses in South Australia, whether they be in the fishing industry, oyster farmers or tourism businesses -- and others as well.
    • (Time expired) So, as a result of the work that we've done, this government is not sitting there throwing stones about this event; we're actually acting to provide the kind of support that South Australians have been looking for. So I'll leave it for Senator Hanson-Young to continue making her political pointscoring about this event. What we're focused on is supporting the South Australian government to respond to the event, and the South Australian government were very clear in expressing their gratitude for the fact that they do have a federal government who's keen to work with them on this event.
    • Senator Hanson-Young, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 59
  • Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, 14:22, page 59 2 min [3]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:22 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Hanson-Young, for the question. As I've pointed out in private meetings with Senator Hanson-Young, both before and after this event, and as I've said publicly, the government has approached this event as being more like a drought than a natural disaster in the sense of a flood, a cyclone or a bushfire. The reason for that is that, when you think about those sorts of natural disasters, they are rapid events that pass through communities, leaving a very devastating trail, as opposed to this kind of event and as opposed to a drought, which are long-running events that build up over a period of time and that can't be fixed, in the sense of doing something to the event -- and we are all waiting for the weather to intervene as soon as possible to disperse this event. But, in the meantime, what we're providing is that $14 million as half of a $28 million package, and that is every single dollar that the South Australian government asked for. Senator Hanson-Young hasn't been able to come up with a proposal about what we should do, other than get out there and issue press releases.
    • Senator Hanson-Young, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 59
  • Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, 14:24, page 59 / Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:24 ( -- ) (): Senator Hanson-Young, I'm very proud to be part of a government that believes it's the responsibility of the government to provide support to the population when they are in need, so that's what we've done. We've used public funding -- taxpayer funding -- to provide support to the South Australian environment and to the South Australian community as they need that. We're not actually interested in playing the kinds of political games that the Greens are playing around this to advance some sort of political pointscoring. What we've actually done is work alongside the South Australian government to provide them with the support that they requested, every single dollar they requested, within 24 hours of receiving the request. We're working very cooperatively with them to make sure that support is provided. Again, if the Greens want to focus on issuing press releases, coming up with slogans, holding rallies about this event, that's your right. What we're actually about is providing the scientific research funding and the financial support that people who are being impacted by this event desperately need.
• Gender Equality 5 min [6]
  • Darmanin, Sen Lisa, Victoria, ALP, 14:25, page 60 / Victoria Deputy Government Whip in the Senate 14:25 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister for Women, Senator Gallagher. Since coming to government in May 2022, the Albanese Labor government has made driving gender equality a key national priority. Supported by investments in the care economy, in Medicare, in equal pay and in skills and training, our agenda is ensuring that women are able to access work and job opportunities of their choice. Why is the government investing in skills and jobs for women? 2 min
  • Darmanin, Sen Lisa, Victoria, ALP, 14:27, page 60 / Victoria Deputy Government Whip in the Senate 14:27 ( -- ) (): We know the Australian labour market is highly gender segregated. Why is it so important to challenge this segregation in the interests of the Australian economy? 2 min
  • Darmanin, Sen Lisa, Victoria, ALP, 14:29, page 60 / Victoria Deputy Government Whip in the Senate 14:29 ( -- ) (): Creating opportunity for women is in our national interest. It is not just a measure of fairness; it's a driver of our success as a nation. How is the Albanese Labor government continuing to work to support the aspirations of women around Australia?
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:25, page 60 3 min [7]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:25 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Darmanin for the question. It is an important one and one that the government has focused on since day one. When we came to government in May 2022, we set about placing women's economic equality right at the front of our economic policy thinking, as a priority across the government. We have put in place a number of measures to make sure that we are driving equality across the economy and across the community. They include, when we look at wages, skills and job opportunities, measures like our tax cuts, which have delivered tax cuts for every woman taxpayer, with 90 per cent of women better off under the reshaped tax cuts that Labor did in the last term. We have, of course, seen a record-low gender pay gap: 11.9 per cent of --
    • You put a tax bracket in, remember that 37c?
    • Don't you like women getting a better share of the tax cuts there, Senator Bragg? Don't you like the gender pay gap lowering to the lowest on record, with women earning $217.40 more per week on average than they did when we came to government. There are 600,000 new jobs for women and record-high labour participation. Why? Because we are making investments in early childhood education and care and in the care economy so more women can have more choices and more opportunities. If they choose to work an extra day, then that opportunity is available to them.
    • We've seen investments in skills, like free TAFE and the establishment of the Commonwealth prac payment for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work. That will, of course, support women who are undertaking those courses. And, of course, we cut the HECS debt. This morning the Senate passed that very important reform. We've reformed indexation. Women are 60 per cent of HECS debt holders, and the reforms passed by this parliament will help them enormously.
    • Senator Darmanin, first supplementary?
    • Interjection [2]
      • Bragg, Sen Andrew, New South Wales, LP, page 60
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 60
    • Continue / Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, page 60
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:28, page 60 1 min [4]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:28 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Darmanin for the question. We do have one of the highest gender segregated labour markets of the OECD. To us on this side of the chamber that's not good enough. We want to make sure that every girl and every boy in Australia gets to do what they want to do, that there are no barriers to them doing training and work experience for the job that they've always dreamed of doing, and at the moment that's not the case.
    • We have a highly segregated labour market, and we want to change that. We want more women going into the traditionally male jobs and we want more men going into the jobs that have been traditionally held by women. Now, as we're dealing with some of those care economic wage issues, we are seeing more men go into aged care for the first time, and that is welcome. We on this side of the chamber will always pursue equality. We don't want to see a labour market where anyone is held back with particularly women denied those opportunities.
    • Senator Darmanin, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 60
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:29, page 61 [8]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:29 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Darmanin, for the question. You put it more eloquently than I did in my previous answer.
    • I can tell you what we will not be doing. We will not be subscribing to the views of those opposite. This week we had the member for Longman, Mr Young, say:
    • Men tend to be more drawn to vocations that involve maths and physical exertion like construction and trades ... Vocations like hairdressing, nursing, social work and the like will always be more female dominated.
    • That is a quote from this week from a 2025 Liberal member. We do not subscribe to that view. We also don't subscribe to views such as those of Senator Antic, who has said:
    • I think a little more patriarchy will help us out, not hurt us at all.
    • Or:
    • ... every angry gender studies professor who thinks that they're going to crush the patriarchy has got some news coming.
    • (Time expired) These are not views that are held over on this side of the chamber. We want to see equality for women and for men. We want opportunities for all.
• Russia 6 min [6]
  • Payman, Sen Fatima, Western Australia, AV, 14:30, page 61 / Western Australia Australia's Voice Whip 14:30 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Wong. Yesterday, it was reported that a tanker carrying fuel refined largely from Russian oil docked in Kwinana, in WA. While sanctions on Russian products exist, the fuel that has arrived in WA was reported to have been processed at the Jamnagar refinery in India. As we sit today, there are three stored oil tankers filled with products also tainted by laundered Russian oil, unable to ship to Europe because the EU has cracked down on the types of sanction evasions we're seeing happen right now in my home state. Western Australians need to be sure that, when they're pulling the trigger at the bowser, they aren't helping to pull triggers in Ukraine. What is the status of the fuel shipment, given the sanctions the government has placed on Russia? 3 min
  • Payman, Sen Fatima, Western Australia, AV, 14:33, page 61 / Western Australia Australia's Voice Whip 14:33 ( -- ) (): The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air found that 55 per cent of the crude used at India's Jamnagar refinery comes from Russia. Since the invasion of Ukraine, Australia has imported US$2.3 billion worth of fuel from these refineries, with an estimated $1.3 billion flowing straight back to Russia in taxes. Can the minister assure Australians that this money will not be contributing to the invasion of Ukraine? 2 min
  • Payman, Sen Fatima, Western Australia, AV, 14:35, page 62 / Western Australia Australia's Voice Whip 14:35 ( -- ) (): Minister, you mentioned earlier the European Union. Will the government follow the EU's lead to close these loopholes that are available for third countries and send in Border Force to stop this fuel from reaching Australian bowsers?
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:31, page 61 2 min [5]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:31 ( -- ) (): Through you, President: as Senator Payman would know, we have imposed strict sanctions and other trade measures to restrict the import purchase and transport of oil coming from, or that originated in, Russia. Last month I announced our first sanctions against Russia's shadow fleet to help starve Russia's war machine of revenue. As a result of the measures taken, direct Australian imports of Russian energy products have fallen from $80 million to zero since before Russia's invasion. There has been bipartisan support for that.
    • What Senator Payman references at a systemic level is what happens to energy products which enter via third countries. As I've said publicly, regrettably the mechanisms we would need to track and monitor all energy products via third countries are not in place in those countries. We'll continue to look at what options we can utilise to place further pressure on Russia's oil revenues. I think the senator referenced the European Union ban announced on 18 July, which will come into place in January 2026. I note the European Union has not yet issued any guidance about how that would in fact be implemented.
    • I would also say -- and I think the senator referenced this -- Australians do expect businesses to try and avoid their supply chains inadvertently funding Russia's illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine. The government does call on businesses to uphold that responsibility. But the answer to the question is, firstly, we have sanctioned and we have increased those sanctions, including on the shadow fleet. Secondly, regrettably, there are not the mechanisms in third countries to enable all the issues you raise to be tracked.
    • Senator Payman, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 61
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:33, page 61 2 min [3]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:33 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): I think, Senator Payman, you're asking me to make an assurance about Indian refinery revenue. We are not the government that has responsibility for what occurs in the refineries that you outline. I revert to my previous answer, which is, firstly, we have sanctioned Russia -- and both parties of government have supported this. Secondly, we have expanded that to include the shadow fleet. Thirdly, we are looking at how we might further deal with the issue of importation from a third country, but, at this stage, the mechanisms for that to be tracked don't exist. Fourthly, I would encourage businesses to ensure that their supply chains reflect the position of the Australian community, which is obviously very supportive of Ukraine and very keen to ensure that there is no support flowing to Russia for their illegal and immoral war.
    • Senator Payman, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 62
  • Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 14:35, page 62 / South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:35 ( -- ) (): Certainly we welcome the progress that the European Union has made. As I'm advised, and as I indicated to you, Senator Payman, the announcement has been made. The start date of that announcement is actually January of next year. No guidance has yet been issued that I'm aware of about how it would be implemented. We certainly will be very keen to understand how the European Union seek to deal with the sorts of practical issues that I have described to you. We'll certainly be looking at that and engaging with them as they work through that process.
• Aged Care 6 min [6]
  • Blyth, Sen Leah, South Australia, LP, 14:36, page 62 / South Australia Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 14:36 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator McAllister. Minister, how many older Australians are currently on the national priority system waiting for a home-care package they have been assessed as needing? 2 min
  • Blyth, Sen Leah, South Australia, LP, 14:38, page 62 / South Australia Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 14:38 ( -- ) (): In 2022 the now health minister called the home-care waiting list a national disgrace, but since 2022 the home-care waiting list has more than doubled under your watch. Eighty-seven thousand Australians are now waiting for the care they have been assessed as needing. If the waiting list was a national disgrace three years ago, what words describe Labor's waiting list today? 3 min
  • Blyth, Sen Leah, South Australia, LP, 14:41, page 63 / South Australia Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 14:41 ( -- ) (): Minister, considering the waitlist has more than doubled since 2022, why have you withheld the 83,000 additional home-care packages you promised before the election?
  • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:36, page 62 3 min [10]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 14:36 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Blyth, for the question. I acknowledge the chamber's genuine interest over some time in ensuring that older Australians and older people in our community get safe, dignified and high-quality aged care. That why in the last term of parliament our government, and in particular the now Minister for Communications, did so much work in this area collaboratively across the chamber, passing the new Aged Care Act with support from the opposition. This should be above politics.
    • A point of order. The question was very tight. We're just looking for a number here.
    • The question went to the priority list for home-care packages, and it asked for a number. The minister is being relevant to the question. Minister McAllister, please continue.
    • Home-care packages have hit a record high: 306,000 home-care packages. They have helped cut average waiting times ahead of that transition to the new Support at Home program, which, as you know, starts on 1 November.
    • I'll take that interjection, Senator Ruston. In March 2019 those waiting times peaked at around three years -- three years waiting time in 2019 for a level 4 medium-priority home-care package. That's right.
    • A government senator: Who was the health minister?
    • Who was the health minister -- great question. We are quite aware that there is more work to do, and that's why the reforms that have been passed through this place are so significant and why our investments are so significant. We are looking forward to the circumstance where we can roll out more home-care packages to make sure that people are getting the support that they require, because everybody -- all Australians -- deserves dignity in their older years.
    • Senator Blyth, first supplementary?
    • Interjection [4]
      • Blyth, Sen Leah, South Australia, LP, page 62
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 62
      • Senator Ruston interjecting --, page 62
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 62
    • Continue [3]
      • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, page 62
      • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, page 62
      • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, page 62
  • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:39, page 62 2 min [9]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 14:39 ( -- ) (): We, indeed, are very proud of the work that we are putting in, of the work that has been undertaken to resolve --
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Order across the chamber! Senator Gallagher and Senator Watt! Senator Polley! I'm not going to go around the chamber calling disorderly senators back to order. I called order. I don't want to hear the level of shouting that we heard from the opposition the minute the minister stood.
    • Last financial year, the government invested over $8 billion in the Home Care Packages Program. That compares to just $1 billion 10 years ago. Of course, we need to continue to invest in this sector because our population is ageing, and more and more baby boomers are entering that time --
    • Senator Ruston, stop the running commentary. Minister McAllister, please continue.
    • (Time expired) As I was saying, this is an area that requires significant investment, and we are making those investments -- significantly more money, significantly more packages and significantly more people able to access the care that is being provided as a consequence of our investments. And there is more to come. On 1 November, when the new arrangements kick in, we are looking forward to seeing further improvements.
    • Senator Blyth, second supplementary?
    • Interjection [4]
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 62
      • Senator Ruston interjecting --, page 63
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 63
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 63
    • Continue [2]
      • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, page 62
      • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, page 63
  • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:41, page 63 [5]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 14:41 ( -- ) (): The new Aged Care Act will commence on 1 November 2025, and, with it, our new program will start -- the Support at Home program. From now until that new act commences, we will continue releasing home-care packages each and every week to people assessed as needing in-home care. There will be a continuing high demand for these packages because our population is ageing --
    • Minister McAllister, please resume your seat. I'm really sorry I've had to interrupt you so often. Senator Ruston, I asked you to stop the running commentary. I've called you to account more than anyone else. If you can't listen in silence, I invite to you leave the chamber.
    • (Time expired) It is important to note that people who are assessed as high priority and who need urgent access to home care continue to receive that home-care package within a month and people who are waiting for packages at assessed levels are able to access the Commonwealth Home Support Program. But the truth is that, on 1 November, we will have a new program, and it is a really important step forward, one that the government is proud of and one that we hope the whole parliament can be proud of. It was a bipartisan effort to bring these reforms forward. They were badly needed after a decade of neglect.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Senator Ruston interjecting --, page 63
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 63
    • Continue / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, page 63
• Migration 4 min [6]
  • Whitten, Sen Tyron, Western Australia, PHON, 14:42, page 63 / Western Australia 14:42 () (): My question is to Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Minister Watt. How many permanent resident visas for people who have not become citizens are currently issued in Australia, and why isn't this information published routinely? 1 min
  • Whitten, Sen Tyron, Western Australia, PHON, 14:43, page 63 / Western Australia 14:43 () (): Minister, despite the government promising to cut immigration, the latest Border Force data shows that, after excluding tourists and crew visas, there are 212 million temporary visa holders in the country on top of permanent visa holders. The latest available data says there could be 1.2 million permanent visas on issue. How many people in Australia right now are not Australian citizens, and how many more or fewer than 3.7 million people is it? 2 min
  • Whitten, Sen Tyron, Western Australia, PHON, 14:45, page 64 / Western Australia 14:45 () (): Australia, including my state of Western Australia, is in a housing crisis. The number of Western Australian households that consider their homes unaffordable has almost doubled in two years. Just 48 per cent of hospital emergency department presentations in Western Australia were seen on time. When will your government keep your promises and stop the mass migration program that is making life harder and more expensive for Western Australians?
  • Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, 14:43, page 63 1 min [3]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:43 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whitten. I'm not sure I have that level of detail with me, but I'll certainly seek some guidance on that from the minister's office if we are in a position to provide you with that detail. I'm also not sure that it is correct that that data is not published, so I'll clarify that point as well. If there's any ability for me to come back to you over the course of question time with that information, I'll certainly do so.
    • Senator Whitten, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 63
  • Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, 14:44, page 63 1 min [6]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:44 ( -- ) (): Again, I'll see if I can get access to the specific information that you're seeking. But, given that your question goes to overall migration levels, what I can tell you is that there's been a massive fall in what's known as net overseas migration over the three years since our government was elected. You would have seen from outside the parliament the efforts that we took around international students and a range of other categories. What that has meant is that net overseas migration to Australia peaked at 538,000 in 2022-23 -- the year after we were elected -- obviously based on policy settings that we inherited from the former government.
    • Opposition senators interjecting --
    • Well, that's a fact. And then, as a result of the actions that we've taken over the last three years, the net overseas migration for the 12 months to 31 December 2024 was 341,000 -- down 37 per cent compared to the peak in the year after we were elected.
    • Senator Whitten, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 63
    • Continue / Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, page 63
  • Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, 14:45, page 64 [4]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:45 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whitten. I couldn't agree more that Western Australia, along with the rest of the country, desperately needs more housing built. Senator Whitten, being a new senator here, you may not be aware that, on numerous occasions in the last three years, the Labor government attempted to pass legislation seeking to build more housing and two of the senators who consistently voted against that legislation were Senator Hanson and Senator Roberts. So I would encourage you --
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Senator Hanson and Senator Roberts may no longer have the numbers in the One Nation party room, and I would encourage the new senators to grab the numbers and back Labor as we continue our efforts to build more housing. I'm really encouraged that we finally have a One Nation senator who seems to want to do something about building more homes. Maybe we'll see a change of approach from One Nation compared to what we saw over the last three years. Senator Whitten, we look forward to your support and your new colleague's every time we move those motions in the future.
    • Continue / Watt, Sen Murray, Queensland, ALP, page 64
• Medicare 6 min [6]
  • Ananda-Rajah, Sen Michelle, Victoria, ALP, 14:46, page 64 / Victoria 14:46 () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator McAllister. The Albanese Labor government was focused on strengthening Medicare and delivering cost-of-living relief in our first term of government. That included record investment in bulk-billing, delivering 87 urgent care clinics across the country and delivering the largest cut to the cost of medicines in the history of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. What action is the government taking in this term of parliament to strengthen Medicare and deliver cost-of-living relief to Australians? 3 min
  • Ananda-Rajah, Sen Michelle, Victoria, ALP, 14:49, page 64 / Victoria 14:49 () (): When the Albanese Labor government was first elected, the Royal Australian College of GPs described bulk-billing rates as in 'free fall'. What impact have the government's policies had to improve bulk-billing rates, ensuring more Australians can see a GP for free? 2 min
  • Ananda-Rajah, Sen Michelle, Victoria, ALP, 14:51, page 65 / Victoria 14:51 () (): The Albanese Labor government campaigned on making the single largest investment in Medicare since its creation over 40 years ago, which will mean nine out of 10 GP visits will be bulk-billed by 2030. This approach received widespread support in the community and in the parliament. What progress has the government made on our plans to improve bulk-billing rates over this term of parliament and beyond?
  • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:47, page 64 3 min [4]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 14:47 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Ananda-Rajah. I acknowledge your advocacy for Medicare and for public health in your time in the other place, and doubtless it will continue here. As your question notes, our government has already slashed the cost of medicines. In 2023, we delivered the largest cut to the cost of medicines in the history of the PBS, with the maximum cost of a script falling to $30 from $42.50 previously. But we want to deliver even cheaper medicines, and that's why the government will make sure that a prescription on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme costs no more than $25. This is a 20 per cent cut in the maximum cost of medicines under the PBS, saving Australians more than $200 million a year. Pensioners and concession card holders will have the cost of their PBS medicines frozen at just $7.70 until 2030.
    • Australian Idol You'd have to go way back to 2004 for medicines to be this cheap. To remind people, 2004 was when Rove McManus won the Gold Logie. It's the year that Facebook was launched. It's the year Casey Donovan won , and it is the last time that medicines were this cheap. Make no mistake, this is what Labor governments do. This is what real cost-of-living relief looks like. We know that health care should be accessible for everybody -- no matter how much you make, no matter where you live -- and it's why we will deliver $8.5 billion to expand bulk-billing to every Australian to create a new incentive payment for practices that bulk-bill every patient. This will mean nine out of 10 GP visits will be bulk-billed by 2030. We will also open another 50 Medicare urgent care clinics, and, once all of these clinics are open, four out of five Australians will live within a 20-minute drive of an urgent care clinic.
    • Senator Ananda-Rajah, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 64
  • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:50, page 64 1 min [3]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 14:50 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): Medicare billing data shows that our record investment in Medicare saw an additional six million bulk-billed GP visits in the year to December 2024. That is an important achievement, especially because of what we inherited from those opposite. The previous government liked to inflate their bulk-billing figures by relying on the massive number of COVID-related bulk-billing appointments during the pandemic, like PCR swabs and vaccines. The coalition fudged the figures, magically producing a bulk-billing figure of 88 per cent just on the eve of the last election. The vice-president, no less, of the college of GPs called them out and said that 88 per cent figure was 'misleading' and 'significantly skewed'. And other experts described that as 'a great big lie', 'essentially rubbish' and 'completely meaningless'. We are taking a very different approach.
    • Senator Ananda-Rajah, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 65
  • McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:51, page 65 / New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 14:51 (Tim e expired) ( -- ) (): On 23 February, the Prime Minister announced our policy, the most significant investment in Medicare's history, an investment that will see nine out of 10 GP visits bulk-billed by 2030. The coalition, Mr Dutton and Senator Ruston stood up that day and said quite a few things. They didn't just say that they liked our policy; they liked it so much in fact that they wanted parliament to be recalled to pass it. Do you remember that, Senator Ruston? That wasn't actually everything that Senator Ruston had to say on that day. She also talked about Peter Dutton, a man who has a very strong and proud track record as the Leader of the Opposition but also as the health minister. This was the shadow minister's favourite health minister. What did she like most about Peter Dutton, one wonders? Was it attempting to introduce the GP tax? Was that the favourite thing, Senator Ruston? Was it ripping billions out of public hospitals? We stand by our commitments in the campaign, and the question is: do you stand by yours?
• Artificial Intelligence 6 min [6]
  • Sharma, Sen Dave, New South Wales, LP, 14:52, page 65 3 min [3]
    • New South Wales 14:52 () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. The Treasurer has said that the government sees AI, artificial intelligence, as 'a huge opportunity for Australia'. He said:
    • ... it's a key part of our productivity agenda, an absolute game changer ... Regulation will matter but we are overwhelmingly focused on capabilities and opportunities, not just guardrails.
    • AFR Yet, at the AI summit in June, Senator Ayres, the Minister for Industry and Innovation, promised to give unions a significant say over the AI rollout. Can the minister confirm this: do the Treasurer's comments reflect the government's approach to the opportunities presented by AI?
  • Sharma, Sen Dave, New South Wales, LP, 14:55, page 65 / New South Wales 14:55 () (): The ACTU are promoting a plan for companies to be banned from receiving government funding and contracts if they don't meet union demands on AI implementation. Given Minister Ayres's previous commitments to the unions, has the government made any concessions to the ACTU on AI ahead of the reform roundtable? 2 min
  • Sharma, Sen Dave, New South Wales, LP, 14:57, page 66 / New South Wales 14:57 () (): Thanks for that answer, Minister. Can the minister rule out that productivity-stifling concessions on AI have not and will not be made to unions in advance of the reform summit and that outcomes won't just be another stitch-up like the last jobs and skills summit?
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:53, page 65 3 min [5]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:53 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Sharma for the question. It's an important question -- the question around AI. There are obviously a lot of opportunities that come with AI, but there are also challenges, and I think we need to be upfront about that. Senator Ayres and Mr Charlton in the other place are leading the work across government looking at AI across the economy. My responsibility is looking at AI across government, and I'm doing that. Of course, the Treasurer is included in all of those discussions, as you would expect, as our leading economic spokesperson. We do believe there is a role, an important role, for unions to play in discussions, alongside other stakeholders. I've held a round table recently on AI. There is a lot of engagement from business community because they see the opportunities and challenges as well. Indeed, in the last few weeks I've spent time with a number of the big companies in Australia who are implementing AI across their businesses, and all of them talk about working with their employees in one way or another, including with union representatives.
    • This is an issue that workers deserve to have a say on and to be involved in. This is a big change coming to workplaces. It's happening already. There is no going back. But there is a responsibility on us as leaders in government, in business and across society to ensure that working people and jobs and the opportunities that come with AI are considered fully and that different viewpoints are heard. We make no apology for that at all.
    • (Time expired) I would encourage the opposition to engage in similar terms. If you want to be serious about the opportunities and challenges of AI, get involved. Talk to unions, talk to business and understand what is happening.
    • Senator Sharma, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 65
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:56, page 65 1 min [4]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:56 ( -- ) (): I don't think it's any surprise that the ACTU would advocate on behalf of their members and member organisations. The Business Council and the Ai Group -- any stakeholder representation group -- come in and do the same; of course they do. The government is keen to work with business and unions on how we manage and respond to AI across the economy. We want to find consensus where there is one and we want to deal with some of these challenges. Every country is dealing with them. Australia is no different. But to suggest that the ACTU shouldn't have a voice or that workers shouldn't have a say or be consulted or have real influence on our thinking is ridiculous. It will relegate you. Those views will relegate you to the opposition benches for years to come if that's the view you hold.
    • (Time expired) Workers have a right to have a say. Business has a right to have a say. Governments should listen to all of that and find a sensible pathway through it.
    • Senator Sharma, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 66
  • Gallagher, Sen Katy, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:57, page 66 [2]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:57 ( -- ) (): Of course, as Senator Sharma will know, the opposition are coming -- they are being represented at the productivity roundtable -- so I think that the imputation that there's a 'stitch-up', and all of that sort of language, is regretful, because the opposition have been given a seat at the table to engage in those discussions.
    • We think there's a lot of opportunity that comes from bringing stakeholders together in that kind of environment, to find areas of consensus and to work out ways through it. We are very optimistic about the productivity roundtable. We hope that every invitee comes with ideas but also prepared to listen to alternative views. The opposition is going to be represented there. I guess it's over to the opposition as to whether they want to come with fully formed views like that, that disengage from the real opportunities, or with a willingness to listen. It's over to you.
• Housing 7 min [6]
  • Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, 14:58, page 66 5 min [4]
    • New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 14:58 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, Senator Ayres. In its first term, the Albanese Labor government prioritised building more homes.
    • Opposition senators interjecting --
    • They don't want to hear it, do they? More than 500,000 homes have been built nationwide since Labor was elected in May 2022. This sits alongside 'making it easier to buy' and 'making it better to rent' as one of the pillars of the government's $43 billion housing plan. Why is it necessary for the government to increase the supply of housing?
    • Continue / Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, page 66
  • Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, 15:03, page 67 / New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 15:03 ( -- ) (): Industry expects the Albanese Labor government's build-to-rent legislation will deliver 80,000 new rental properties. What impact will this policy have on renters and Australians hoping to buy a home? 2 min
  • Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, 15:05, page 67 / New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 15:05 ( -- ) (): The Albanese Labor government has a wide range of policies to increase housing supply. What progress has the government made on its commitment to making sure all Australians have access to safe and secure housing?
  • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, 14:59, page 66 5 min [29]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 14:59 Financial Review ( -- ) (): I'm very grateful to Senator Sheldon for that question, although I've been hoping for the whole fortnight that Senator Sharma would ask me the question that he just directed towards Senator Gallagher, because, I have to say, his opinion piece in the --
    • Senator Ruston, a point of order?
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Order! I'm waiting. Order!
    • A point of order on relevance -- I think the minister perhaps should be brought back to the question.
    • Thank you, Senator Ruston. Minister Ayres, I am going to direct you back to the question.
    • It was just one little joke! I really am grateful for this question, though. We have been absolutely focused as a government on delivering new homes and the homes that Australians need -- 28,000 homes under construction or in planning now. That contrasts with what happened under the previous government, under their program -- 373 homes over a decade. The truth is that Australians know, when they build a home, it takes time to build a home. You've got to work your way through it. Do you know who agrees with us about housing supply?
    • Opposition senators interjecting --
    • Minister Ayres, please resume your seat. Those on my left might find this amusing; I do not. It is my job to keep order in this chamber, and you are making it incredibly difficult. If you can't sit in silence, leave the chamber. Minister Ayres.
    • Do you know who agrees with us? It's Senator Bragg, whom Senator Cash referred to yesterday as 'Braggie'! I don't know whether it's Braggie with an i-e or Braggy with a y at the end.
    • Opposition senators interjecting --
    • On a point of order, you'd think the minister might be able to answer --
    • Just get to the point of order, Senator Ruston.
    • his own dixer. He's not being relevant to his own question.
    • Senator Ruston, there is an incredible amount of comment from the opposition side, and, as you are well aware, the minister can take those comments. I would like the question to be answered. I'm sure you would as well. That requires all of you on the opposition benches not to interject. Minister Ayres.
    • He said:
    • We need to find a way to unlock supply, otherwise we're going to make the problem worse.
    • That was his view a few months ago -- old Braggie. We don't call him Braggie over here.
    • Senator Ayres --
    • We call him 'Home Blokka'. That's what this guy is all about.
    • Senator Ayres!
    • That's b-l-o-k-k-a -- Home Blokka!
    • Senator Ayres, I am going to ask you to withdraw.
    • I withdraw.
    • Please continue.
    • (Time expired) Why are we working so hard with the states, with developers, with local government and with investors to deal with the questions of supply? It's because, in substance, it matters because it's about actually doing things.
    • Senator Sheldon, first supplementary?
    • Interjection [14]
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 66
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 66
      • Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, page 66
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 66
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 66
      • Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, page 67
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
      • Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, page 67
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
      • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
    • Continue [7]
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 66
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 66
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 67
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 67
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 67
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 67
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 67
  • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, 15:04, page 67 1 min [3]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 15:04 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): Eighty thousand new, high-quality homes, just for renters; thousands of affordable tenancies with caps on rent -- access to secure, long-term rentals will change the lives of hundreds of thousands of Australians. Men and women; little kids -- lives will be changed. How do Senator Bragg and the coalition describe this life-changing nation-building scheme? 'A nightmare,' he says. 'A foreign investor tax cut.' Now the Liberal Party of Australia is opposed to foreign investment. What on Earth is going on? What on Earth is going on in terms of ideological consistency over there if you're opposed to investment in housing, in development, in building projects and in developing Australian construction projects? You have entirely lost your way. The same senator who said in his first speech that our tax system and broader policy settings --
    • Senator Sheldon, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, page 67
  • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, 15:05, page 67 [6]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 15:05 ( -- ) (): Everybody deserves a decent home. What Senator Bragg said in his first speech was:
    • Our tax system and broader policy settings must encourage foreign investment ...
    • He meant it then; he doesn't mean it now. It's a symbol of the sort of inconsistency and hyperpartisanship of this show.
    • We have got straight to work from our first term in government. We took the Commonwealth from being a negligent bystander under the previous government to a government with the boldest and most ambitious housing program since the Second World War. In three years, we've invested $43 billion in housing, compared to just $5 billion in the previous long, turgid decade of negligence and absolute disengagement from building new homes for Australians.
    • I ask that further questions be placed on notice.
    • Interjection / Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, page 67

• Closing The Gap / Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 15:06, page 68 / South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 15:06 Hansard ( -- ) (): I have some further information in relation to the question asked of me today by Senator Liddle, which I will simply read into the . The Commonwealth is delivering on a shared commitment with the NT to improve housing for First Nations people in remote communities. Under the historic $4 billion housing agreement, up to 2,700 homes will be built over the next 10 years to reduce overcrowding and improve living conditions across 73 communities and 27 town camps. In 2024-25, a record 222 houses were delivered in remote locations in the NT. This builds on the 206 houses completed in 2023-24 and the 257 houses completed in 2022-23. 1 min
• Construction, Forestry And Maritime Employees Union / Wong, Sen Penny, South Australia, ALP, 15:07, page 68 / South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 15:07 ( -- ) (): In question time on Monday 28 July, I undertook to provide further information in response to questions asked of me by Senator Bragg in my capacity as the Minister representing the Prime Minister relating to the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union. I have written to the senator to provide additional information, and I table my letter to the senator for the information of all senators. I thank the Senate.

• Answers To Questions 26 min [5]
  • Collins, Sen Jessica, New South Wales, LP, 15:08, page 68 6 min [16]
    • New South Wales Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 15:08 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.
    • I rise to take note particularly of the minister's response to the question of national security and defence spending. Once again, we've seen Labor dodge, deflect and ultimately disrespect the seriousness of Australia's strategic circumstances and the question of national security. I asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister why the Albanese government had abandoned its previous commitment to set defence spending targets as a proportion of GDP. In 2022, Labor claimed it was vital to set such targets in response to rising global threats. Yet now, as the world becomes even more unstable, the government refuses to follow through. That commitment was not made lightly. It was announced in the context of an increasingly volatile Indo-Pacific, with rising military assertiveness from authoritarian powers and our most important allies urging Australia to pull its weight.
    • Yet today that commitment has disappeared into thin air without sufficient explanation, without accountability. The minister notes an increase in defence spending but fails to answer why it is not to the sufficient level promised. And what did we get from Minister Wong? We got a distraction from one inconvenient truth. That truth is that Labor doesn't take defence seriously. This government has no credible plan to lift defence spending to the levels our allies and even their own Defence Strategic Review say are needed. Instead of providing a real answer, the minister threw around weak excuses.
    • I also asked whether the Prime Minister has ever attended or participated in an Australian military exercise. As someone who joined our troops during Exercise Talisman Sabre, I've seen firsthand the professionalism, sacrifice and strategic importance of what they do. The minister talked about herself, about the Minister for Defence, but not about the Prime Minister. I acknowledge her efforts and appreciate her involvement, but it is not unreasonable to expect the Prime Minister of this nation to show up for our troops. Some might think otherwise, but those on this side of the chamber do not.
    • Finally, I raised the Prime Minister's decision to spend six days touring China while choosing not to attend Talisman Sabre. He had time to meet with People's Liberation Army officers but not with our own troops or allied commanders. I asked why he made time for China's military leadership but couldn't find time to stand beside Australian soldiers during our most significant joint defence exercise. What was he doing there? Patting pandas in China -- pandering to China, some might say. He had time to stroll down memory lane in China, paying tribute to past Labor figures and visiting tourist sites, but he couldn't find the time to visit the troops. He didn't even bother to show up. The Prime Minister of this country chose to shake hands with officers from China's People's Liberation Army instead of standing shoulder to shoulder with Australian soldiers and our allies during a critical moment for our regional defence posture. That's not just poor optics; I believe that it is a failure of leadership.
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Supplementary questions were put to the minister, but, again, there were no real answers. Is it true that the Prime Minister has never attended an Australian military exercise? There's no denial; just more waffle. And why did he prioritise a six-day China tour over meeting our defence personnel? Again, nothing of substance. It certainly doesn't pass the pub test. Labor wants the headline without the hard decisions. They want to talk about strategic competition, but they won't fund the capabilities. They want to mention AUKUS, but they're asleep at the wheel when it comes to delivery. Our defence industry is at stake.
    • Un-Australian is what this is.
    • There is no continuous building program, nor are there rules about local content, to the detriment of our national security. It's easy to talk about hard power when you're behind a podium in Canberra, but it's much harder to actually stand up at Shoalwater Bay, stand next to our soldiers and prove you understand the stakes.
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Senator O'Neill, sit down. I'm not going to call anyone until there's order in the chamber. Senator Ayres, some of your contributions have been very unhelpful to order in the chamber. You had the right to stand up and take a point of order, Senator Ayres. Instead you decided to interject from your seat. That is highly disorderly. Senator O'Sullivan?
    • President, further to what you've just ruled there, I'd ask Senator Ayres to reflect on the fact that you were directing him to be quiet and he was forceful in the way that he spoke when directing his comments through to Senator Collins, and I thought the way that he was addressing it through you was entirely inappropriate.
    • Everyone in this chamber has the right to take a point of order if they have a legitimate point of order to take against a speaker. Clearly, you knew there was no point of order to take, Senator Ayres, which is why you did it from your seat. However, we should continue with taking note of answers.
    • Interjection [4]
      • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, page 69
      • Brockman, Sen Slade (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP, page 69
      • O'Sullivan, Sen Matt, Western Australia, LP, page 69
      • Brockman, Sen Slade (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP, page 69
    • Continue [2]
      • Collins, Sen Jessica, New South Wales, LP, page 68
      • Collins, Sen Jessica, New South Wales, LP, page 69
  • O'Neill, Sen Deborah, New South Wales, ALP, 15:14, page 69 5 min [7]
    • New South Wales 15:14 () (): What we just saw in question time with the question, and with this response, from a very new senator -- and I will acknowledge that she gave a very thoughtful contribution yesterday in her first speech -- is a clear misunderstanding of how a proper cabinet government that is disciplined undertakes the share of the work, distributed across all of those people for whom there are responsibilities. Both the defence minister and the Foreign minister attended Talisman Sabre. I'm glad that the new member has arrived and has had the experience of sharing some time with the ADF, but dripping with sanctimony about two or three days with the ADF is no argument of any substance at all.
    • The defence of the nation is a critical part of what this government does. There's overlap in all sorts of other areas with state governments, but defence is the responsibility of the federal government. It's so important that, of all the things that could be spoken about in the address-in-reply, we had the Governor-General put these words on the record:
    • There is no greater responsibility for government than keeping Australians safe and securing our nation's future.
    • We stand by that, we are committed to that and we seek, in these incredibly tumultuous times, bipartisanship on that. But there is no way that this undisciplined mob, who lost so spectacularly at the last election, are capable of rising to that challenge. The Australian people need a lot better than what's on offer from the opposition in terms of accountability of the government with regard to the defence of the nation and the very existence of our country.
    • The twee points that were made in what I thought was a terrible set of questions -- and a disgraceful contribution then, frankly -- belie the fact that, under the opposition, we had $42 billion worth of announcements for defence, with zero dollars allocated in the budget for it. When you're after a headline and you're seeking to be sanctimonious and superior, we get the kind of contribution we had today. When you're dedicated to delivering for the nation in a real and practical way, you do the investment and you make the announcement at the same time. You don't make an announcement and leave it hanging with no allocation. That is the record of those opposite. No wonder Senator Collins expects the Prime Minister to be in 15 places at once. Let's face it: she's used to having a prime minister who gives himself six portfolios. That's how they run the government. What a joke!
    • What I'm really concerned about is that what we saw in question time today is edging towards a shift away from the bipartisanship that is vital to this nation. The facts belie the image that was attempted to be re-created here today. The facts are that the Albanese government has increased defence funding to record levels. That includes acquiring new capabilities for our Australian Defence Force of whom we are all proud. We honour their service. We honour their sacrifice to this nation. And nearly every single one of us around this chamber has been out with the ADF, in the program that we're provided for, to go and experience it firsthand and see what's happening. We know there are challenges, and that's why the Albanese government not just announced but actually added $10.6 billion over the forward estimates to our defence budget and $57.6 billion over the decade.
    • (Time expired) Those opposite can try and make points about what happens in our day-to-day interactions with others and the responsibilities that we need to take on as a government, but the money that we're investing in defence is an indication of how committed we are to that primary job of protecting our nation -- not $42 billion of announcements, but $56 billion of cold, hard Australian earned cash to make sure we are protected. It's not a game; it's not to be played with. What we saw today was an absolute disgrace. The Albanese government will continually assess our defence capabilities, and we will resource them -- no headline-grabbing stunts and no pretence, but real hard work -- in an orderly way, with hard dollars to back it in.
  • Canavan, Sen Matthew, Queensland, NATS, 15:19, page 70 5 min [7]
    • Queensland 15:19 () (): First of all, I want to congratulate Senator Collins on an excellent contribution. We know it was excellent -- and the people listening today know it was excellent -- because she's taking a lot of flak. When you're taking a lot of flak, you know you're over the target and you know that Labor is very, very sensitive about this. They're very, very sensitive about this issue of defence spending because they've got lots to be sensitive about. They are doing nothing right now to protect our nation's defence. They make announcements, like Senator O'Neill just mentioned, of billions of dollars of money to be spent in the future but never in the present. It's actually what happens in the present that's going to make the difference between us being able to properly defend our nation and not being able to.
    • I first want to pick up on something that Senator O'Neill accused the coalition of: somehow departing from bipartisanship here on this issue. It is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black here because the Labor Party over the last few years have, time and time again, accused the coalition of destroying the relationship with China. Apparently, it was our fault that China took unilateral, illegal action to ban our exports because we had the temerity to say they couldn't build their Huawei network and we had the temerity to ask for a proper explanation of how the hell coronavirus was unleashed on the world. Both things were very reasonable to do, and the Labor Party didn't oppose them. But then they took China's side. They took China's side on the illegal trade actions China took and gave them credence and, somehow, justification to ban our coal, our barley, our lobster and our red wine. Instead of standing up for Australia's right to say, 'We will decide who builds our 5G network' -- which pretty much every other Western country has joined on us now -- they decided to take the Chinese Communist Party's side on the illegal trade action it took. Instead of defending Australia's sovereign right to pass foreign interference laws -- which we did, and, again, China had a disagreement with us on that, but we had the sovereign right to do it -- they sided with the Chinese government. And now they come in this place and say: 'You can't criticise us for our defence policy, because that would be un-Australian.'
    • No. What is un-Australian is to not stand up for our defence interests right now and point out what is going wrong right now. The biggest issue here is that the Australian government, unfortunately, does not seem to be engaging with our most important friend and ally, the United States. They have not provided a considered response to the request from the United States for our country to lift our defence spending and to work with them on a number of specific defence projects. We can have a reasonable debate about whether we should lift our defence spending or not. But it is at least legitimate for our friend and ally, who provides us with significant military support and with whom we have engaged in the most significant military agreement since the Second World War, the AUKUS agreement, to request that we life our load and contribute to the relationship.
    • When US Defense Secretary Hegseth made this request at the Shangri-La conference a few months ago, he gave a very considered speech that I encourage all senators to read. He obviously spent a lot of the speech talking about China and the aggressive actions they are taking in our region, threatening many of our friends and neighbours. But one thing that has gone unremarked is that the country he mentioned the second most was Australia. He mentioned us seven times through that speech. All of those mentions were very positive, but many of them indicated how he wants to work with Australia. He mentioned how the American government is establishing a project in Australia to repair P-8 radar systems. He mentioned how he'd like to work with Australia and for us to develop guided weapons and explosive ordnance supply chains. He mentioned how he'd like Australia to produce 155-millimetre ammunition, which is the bedrock of every defence force. A major issue is that Russia can produce more of that type of ammunition than the entirety of the NATO countries can right now in any one year, so it's very important for us to produce 155-millimetre ammunition. When we were in government, we supported a facility in Maryborough to do this.
    • Why aren't we working with the Americans on this? Pete Hegseth gave that speech, a very considered speech and an olive branch to our country. The Prime Minister was asked about it, and he said:
    • Well, we're a sovereign nation. And the idea that we, you know, respond to every comment that's made ... what we do is serious policy.
    • (Time expired) That is an insult. That is an absolute insult for our Prime Minister to respond to a considered speech like that by saying, 'We don't respond to every comment.' I mean, get serious, guys. Take seriously what the US Defense Secretary says, instead of making juvenile and naive responses like that. I am very worried about where our country's defence policy is right now, because our government doesn't seem to be in control.
  • Polley, Sen Helen, Tasmania, ALP, 15:24, page 70 5 min [8]
    • Tasmania 15:24 () (): I just want to concur with the comments made by my Senate colleague Senator O'Neill. I think today demonstrates that those opposite still haven't learnt anything -- not even after going through another election where they were defeated. We are investing in defence spending, as they well know. But they've come in and taken a shot at the Prime Minister, when we have a Minister for Defence and when they know very well that a Prime Minister cannot be at every event that he or she may want to attend. But the reality is that we've had to undertake a massive clean-up of the messes that you guys left behind after 11 long years of being in government. Defence is just one of those.
    • Let's talk about something that impacts every Australian just as much as national security and our Defence Force, and that is aged care. Let's talk about aged care, shall we? In 11 years, they had five failed ministers for aged care -- five! In government, they had to call a royal commission into their own failings. Now, I would be turning away, too, if I were you, Senator Cash, and ignoring the fact that what I'm saying is absolutely right. They were your own failings; you had to call a royal commission. And what was the name of that report? Can anyone tell me? 'Neglect' -- neglect!
    • So, again, we've had to come in and take the time because there are so many messes. Aged care is just one of those. The investment that we've made into aged care has been so significant. Residential aged care in this country was in a shambles, thanks to those opposite. They didn't invest the money needed to ensure that we had a well-educated, trained workforce. No, they didn't do that. Did they ensure that home-care packages were meeting needs? No, they didn't. Are we an ageing population? Yes, we are. Unfortunately, that's increasing all the time, so the demand is always going to outstrip the capacity of any government to deliver everything that we want. But for you to come in here and lecture us and ask about home-care packages, with your failings -- I mean, let's be real: five failed ministers!
    • If we want to go back and talk about the pandemic and what happened in aged care in this country during that time -- who was in government? That's right; it was those opposite. How many people died in residential aged care because there was no registration of aged-care workers in this country? Those workers, who were earning lower wages than most Australians, had to have a second job, so they were going from one residential care home to another. So don't come into this place and try to lecture us about not doing enough. We have set the foundations in our first term around aged care.
    • We have had to re-establish our international reputation because of the way those opposite, when they were in government, ruined it in so many areas. And let's not even talk about what their reputation was in the Pacific with our closest neighbours.
    • Now they want to attack the Prime Minister, who is doing his job. The Minister for Defence is doing a great job -- Minister Richard Marles. He's very good, he's highly respected, and he's working with Defence, making the strategic decisions about how and where we invest our money.
    • Then there were questions today about Closing the Gap targets. We have been investing in our Indigenous brothers and sisters, wanting to lift up their opportunities in this country. But, again, you haven't got a very good track record on this issue yourselves.
    • (Time expired) We want to talk about artificial intelligence. We've engaged with the union movement and want to see good, highly qualified, skilled jobs in this area where there's a lot of opportunities. We should be getting people to invest in AI in this country. But what do those opposite do? They pluck another thing out of the air. They just want to come in here and say that we're not doing enough, or we're dealing with the wrong people. Maybe some of you should pick up the phone and have a chat with some unionists --
  • O'Sullivan, Sen Matt, Western Australia, LP, 15:29, page 71 [5]
    • Western Australia 15:29 () (): Having just been re-elected for my second term of six years, I've spent a little bit of time -- and I'm sure others in this place are in the same boat -- pondering about what I've achieved and what needs to be achieved over this term. One of the things -- and I know you know me well, Deputy President Brockman -- that really drove me to run for parliament in the first place back in 2018-19 was this issue of closing the gap. Those who know me know I spent 10 years working in that space, particularly in the employment area, working to close the gap in employment and see that unemployment rate reduce. My firm belief is that while employment won't change everything, without it nothing will change. If you can increase that economic empowerment and economic independence, not only do you change the life of the individual; indeed, they change it for themselves, their entire families and the community.
    • Unfortunately, one of my great disappointments -- and this isn't a political statement; I'm not pointing fingers at any individual, any party or any situation -- is that we haven't seen enough progress in this space, in terms of closing the gap. It's very disheartening. We get the pleasure of a job like we have here in this place but the reality for people at the coalface of dealing with this, for individuals in communities across Australia that are facing the many challenges that are represented by the stats we've seen reported on today, it's very confronting and it's very real.
    • One of the concerns I've got about the way this government is handling this issue is in the area of economic participation. It's great to see that the economic participation target is somewhat on track; they're saying that 55.7 per cent of people aged 25 to 64 years were employed in 2021. It's good that that's on track, but I question how that is being measured and what's going on behind that statistic. We know the government have made the decision -- admittedly, with the support of the Coalition of Peaks and others who have informed this important tracking process -- to include participation in, for example, the Remote Jobs and Economic Development Program and the rangers type programs. I don't want to denigrate them, because those programs have a place, but, ultimately, the real measure needs to be whether or not we're getting people participating in an economic space that is independent of government, that is a market job rather than a government directed or government funded job. A lot of the programs and the jobs that are funded through these programs are very dependent on government and, in many cases, are displacing real jobs that exist within the marketplace, in the common labour market.
    • I'm very concerned that, when we measure things like the Closing the Gap targets, we measure outcomes that really matter and that we measure those in a serious way so we can get people liberated and off their dependence on welfare and government. You could be on a program like this for long enough to get long service leave, being in a welfare-driven, supported program, whereas we really need to be getting people into sustainable jobs that are not dependent on government continually having to prop up those jobs. I don't denigrate the good work that is supported by many of these programs, but if we're limiting ourselves and we're not thinking with the blue sky thinking we need, where we lift our vision for Australia, then I fear we will continue to hold people back and prevent them from having the full benefits of being liberated, from an economic point of view.
    • Question agreed to.
• South Australia: Marine Environment / Pocock, Sen Barbara, South Australia, AG, 15:34, page 72 [9]
  • South Australia 15:34 () (): I move:
  • That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for the Environment and Water (Senator Watt) to a question without notice asked by Senator Hanson-Young today relating to algal bloom in South Australia.
  • South Australians love their beaches, and I certainly number myself amongst them. In May of this year, I spent a week down at the Victor Harbor area of our state and witnessed there, for the first time personally, the awful yellow sludge that was flowing across our beaches and blowing along the coast of our beautiful state. I spoke to a number of surfers, to small-business people and to fisherpeople about the impact and the fear they held about what was coming our way as a result of a toxic algal bloom that we did not understand. I felt its effects on my own skin. Surfers talked about the impact of skin reactions and about the impact on their own lungs.
  • But, since that time, we have witnessed an unfolding crisis -- a loss of hundreds and hundreds and thousands of marine creatures along our South Australian shores. Not so long ago, I went to the public meeting of South Australians at the Brighton & Seacliff Yacht Club. Hundreds of South Australians came out to share their grief at the crisis unfolding in the places they love and to the creatures that they care about. Many were citizen scientists who themselves have collected the dead bodies of seals and of large creatures like sharks. We've seen dead dolphins. We've seen all species of fish, and we've seen our very rare sea dragons, coming up in their hundreds, stranded on those shores.
  • South Australians have been deeply shocked by what we have witnessed, and what we've seen on our shores is a small part of what is going on under the waves. There is a bushfire equivalent underway in the waters off the South Australian coast. It is deeply shocking, and it is a major crisis for many of our industries that depend on that marine life. We've got people whose livelihoods are threatened very fundamentally -- who haven't caught a fish for months or whose oyster leases are at risk. Not only are we seeing right now the dead bodies of marine life, which really concerns us; the concern is that this is going to go on for months and months and possibly years and affect those livelihoods.
  • We also see, as we sit here, the possibility of that algal bloom reaching up into the top of the gulf and threatening species and tourist industries that are incredibly important to us -- the giant creatures that thousands of Australians visit and see at the top of the gulf, and the beautiful underwater nature that is there is now at risk from this bloom. As my colleague Senator Hanson-Young made clear, if this were happening in Bondi or if this were happening in St Kilda, we would have a COVID-level response. It would have kicked into gear months ago. Instead, we have waited four months for Minister Watt to get to South Australia and spend the 11 minutes that he did on the shore in our state looking at our problem, and he wrote a cheque and he matched the cheque of our Premier Malinauskas. It's a small cheque. When you look at the millions of dollars that are going to go out of those industries and cost our South Australian economy, it is so far from what is needed to support those businesses.
  • I also want to talk about the scientists who came along to the public meeting not so long ago and showed us the images of what it looked like under the jetty on Yorke Peninsula six, eight and 10 months ago and what it looks like now. It is devastating. It is truly shocking that we are going to see more and more of these algal blooms around our country on a reef system that stretches from right over towards New Zealand to beyond Perth. This is the southern reef system, which is potentially being affected over time by rising ocean temperatures that scientists have been telling us about for years. They have been saying increases in ocean temperature are going to put our coastal marine life at risk, and it's partly driven by changes in the underwater ecology. We know our seagrass systems and our giant kelp systems are not what they were. Over decades, they have changed. And they are a natural rehabilitation, we hear, from the scientists, of that algae. But they are gone; they've been decimated.
  • (Time expired) But the really important difference now is that we are reaping the product of fossil fuels and their impact in driving a climate crisis that is increasing the temperature of our oceans, risking our beautiful marine life and not only our economic wellbeing but so many things that South Australians treasure.
  • Question agreed to.

• New South Wales 15:41 () (): by leave -- I present the report of the Australian parliamentary delegation to the 150th Inter-Parliamentary Union Assembly, which took place from 5 to 9 April 2025. I move:
• That the Senate take note of the document.
• From 2 to 9 April this year, I travelled to Tashkent, the capital of the Republic of Uzbekistan, as part of the delegation to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, known as the IPU. It was no ordinary delegation. As the House of Representatives had been prorogued for the election, I had the privilege of representing our very much respected Speaker, the Hon. Milton Dick, as the delegation leader on this occasion. I was also accompanied by my then colleague from the Senate, Senator Reynolds. While the delegation was small, the task was significant. We certainly missed the company and the leadership of the Speaker, but we did our very best to represent Australia's interests and to build relationships with our fellow parliamentarians from around the world.
• Australia's contribution to the IPU is longstanding and substantial, with continuous participation in parliamentary diplomacy to promote peace, cooperation and mutual understanding among nations. Prior to the commencement of the formal assembly, I had the honour of representing our Speaker as chairperson of the Sub-Committee on Finance to the Executive Committee.
• Senator Reynolds, in what would be her final contribution to the IPU, continued her vital work on addressing orphanage trafficking. She facilitated a discussion on the implementation of the 2023 resolution on this issue, hosted by the Standing Committee on Democracy and Human Rights.
• While political debate in Australia is often robust and occasionally intense, when a bipartisan delegation travels abroad, we act as one -- as team Australia. I was, therefore, very proud to preside as President over the same committee in which Senator Reynolds had advanced her work on orphanage trafficking.
• During the assembly in Tashkent, I continued my advocacy on tax avoidance and evasion. I introduced a resolution condemning the predatory tax practices of certain multinational enterprises and reaffirmed Australia's commitment to fair and transparent global trade. Firms such as PwC have promoted schemes that allow multinational enterprises to exploit jurisdictional gaps, enabling them to operate across borders with little accountability while maximising profits. This behaviour undermines the integrity of global tax systems and creates a lawless zone within the infrastructure of international commerce, and, in doing so it, it undermines any movement towards the achievement of the sustainable development goals, on which there is so much consensus yet so little investment.
• I look forward to working with my fellow co-rapporteurs, Mr JMR Edwards of Chile and Ms J Sabao of Zambia, to further international cooperation in this area and to help secure much-needed revenue for nations striving to reach those important sustainable development goals. In the same spirit of multilateral collaboration, I would like to acknowledge the significant efforts of the Standing Committee on Peace and International Security
• and the many delegations to the assembly, in securing a resolution at the IPU, after a considerable period of dissent, on the critical issue that so much of our attention is focused: the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. This achievement in the Standing Committee on Peace and International Security demonstrates that negotiation and consensus can still deliver meaningful outcomes and, indeed, hope. It reassures me that parliament-to-parliament contact and relationships remain vital and effective in striving for peace for our brothers and sisters right across the globe.
• On behalf of the delegation, I extend our deep gratitude to the parliament of Uzbekistan for hosting the 150th IPU Assembly. We are especially thankful, as the Australian delegation, to Senator Kadirxanova Malika Akbarovna and her team for their support throughout the assembly. We also express sincere appreciation to the Deputy Mayor of Tashkent, Dr Shakhnoza Abduvaxitovna Sultanova, whose assistance and hospitality enriched our visit with insight into Uzbek culture and customs.
• I would also like to thank the Speaker for entrusting me with the responsibility of leading this important delegation when, clearly, he was unable to attend. I also thank Dr Jane Thompson for her unwavering support as secretary to our delegation. Finally, I wish to pay tribute to former senator Reynolds for her enduring advocacy and service in representing Australia on the global stage. Awareness about orphanage trafficking is now common knowledge across all the parliaments that have participated in the IPU, and that is a significant contribution to the safety of millions of children.
• Question agreed to.

• New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 15:47 ( -- ) (): I present additional information received by committees relating to the following estimates:
• Additional estimates 2023-24 -- Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee -- Additional information --
• Defence portfolio.
• Foreign Affairs and Trade portfolio.
• Additional estimates 2024-2 5 -- Environment and Communications Legislation Committee -- Additional information --
• Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water portfolio.
• Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts (excluding Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) portfolio.

• Rural And Regional Affairs And Transport Legislation Committee / Report / Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, 15:47, page 74 [2]
  • New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 15:47 ( -- ) (): At the request of the chair of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee
  • I present the report of the committee on an examination of annual reports tabled by 30 April 2025.
• Education And Employment Legislation Committee / Report / Sheldon, Sen Tony, New South Wales, ALP, 15:47, page 74 1 min [3]
  • New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 15:47 ( -- ) (): At the request of the chair of the Education and Employment Legislation Committee
  • Senator Marielle Smith, I present the report of the committee relating to the re-adoption of its inquiry into the quality of governance at Australian higher education providers.
  • Ordered that the report be adopted.
• Privileges Committee / Report / Hume, Sen Jane, Victoria, LP, 15:48, page 74 1 min [21]
  • Victoria 15:48 Person referred to in the Senate : Mr Lesley Turner () (): I present the 186th report of the Committee of Privileges, entitled . I move:
  • That the report be adopted.
  • Hansard This report forms part of a series of reports recommending that a right of reply be afforded to persons who claim to have been adversely affected by being referred to in the Senate either by name or in such a way as to be readily identified. On 28 February 2025 the President received a submission on behalf of Mr Lesley Turner relating to speeches made by Senator Nampijinpa Price in the Senate on 20 August 2024, on 9 September 2024 and on 12 February 2025. The President referred the submissions to the committee under privilege resolution 5. The committee has considered the submission and recommends that Mr Turner's response be incorporated in .
  • The committee reminds the Senate that, in matters of this nature, it doesn't judge the truth or otherwise of statements made by senators or the persons referred to. Rather, it ensures that these persons have submissions, and ultimately the responses it recommends accord with the criteria set out in privilege resolution 5. I commend the motion to the Senate.
  • Question agreed to.
  • Response as recommended by the committee incorporated accordingly --
  • Response of Lesley Turner to comments by Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price in the Senate
  • Proceedings 1. My name is Lesley Turner. I am the CEO of the Central Land Council and the applicant in defamation proceedings filed in the Federal Court of Australia on 5 September 2024 against Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price ().
  • Media Release Allegation 2. The Proceedings concern a Media Release published by Senator Price on 21 July 2024 (). The Media Release incorrectly stated, amongst other things, that a motion of no confidence was moved against me the previous week at a Central Land Council meeting at Watarrka ().
  • Defamation Act 2006 3. The Central Land Council issued a public statement on 22 July 2024 which clearly stated that the Allegation was inaccurate. Senator Price did not retract the Allegation, and I felt I had no option but to instruct solicitors to issue a Concerns Notice to Senator Price under the (NT). The Concerns Notice was served on Senator Price on 29 July 2024.
  • 1. Since the service of the Concerns Notice and the commencement of the Proceedings, Senator Price has made numerous statements to the Senate about matters in issue in the Proceedings or about potential witnesses in the Proceedings which are a clear conflict of interest and which have the potential to interfere with the Proceedings, as follows:
  • A. 20 August 2024
  • On 20 August 2024, approximately a month after being notified by the Central Land Council that the Allegation was inaccurate and three weeks after receipt of the Concerns Notice, Senator Price made a speech in the Senate in which she asserted:
  • "With respect to the Central Land Council, I personally wrote to Minister McCarthy last week to notify her that, at a meeting of the council on 18 July 2024, a no-confidence motion was moved by the chair of the council against its CEO. As far as the chair is concerned, it was successfully passed. The fact that there was a no-confidence motion of this nature in the first place is a red flag in itself. "
  • On 21 February 2025, Senator Price's solicitors notified my solicitors that she would no longer be maintaining the truth defence pleaded in her Amended Defence filed in the Proceedings on 22 December 2024. In other words, she is no longer arguing in the proceedings that what she said about me is true.
  • B. 9 September 2024
  • three very brave, admirable women On 9 September 2024, Senator Price made a speech in which she praised Matthew Palmer, the former Chair of the Central Land Council, and Arrernte elders Sabella Turner, Veronica Lynch and Margaret Lynch. All of these individuals were present in the Senate gallery when the Senator made her speech. They were all, at that time, also potential witnesses in the Proceedings. In her speech, Senator Price called the Arrernte elders "". She also attacked the Central Land Council (and by inference me, as the Central Land Council's CEO):
  • These four are here because they have seen the dysfunction that presently exists within the ranks of the Central Land Council "."
  • C. 12 February 2025
  • On 12 February 2025, Senator Price made a speech in the Senate in which she criticised another witness in the Proceedings. She should not use the Senate as a platform to make speeches about witnesses in her personal litigation.
  • 1. The comments made by Senator Price on 20 August 2024 were false and defamatory. I therefore seek this opportunity to correct the Senate record.
• Senators' Interests Committee / Report / Askew, Sen Wendy, Tasmania, LP, 15:49, page 75 / Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 15:49 ( -- ) (): I present the Register of Senators' Interests, incorporating statements of registrable interests and notifications of alterations lodged between 1 January and 30 June 2025.
• Scrutiny Of Delegated Legislation Committee / Delegated Legislation Monitor / O'Neill, Sen Deborah, New South Wales, ALP, 15:49, page 75 10 min [27]
  • New South Wales 15:49 Delegated legislation monitor No. 4 () (): I present the of 2025 of the Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation together with ministerial correspondence, and I move:
  • That the Senate take note of the report.
  • I rise to speak in response to the monitor that I have just described on the record. It reports on the committee's consideration of no fewer than 596 legislative instruments registered between 1 March and 24 July 2025. In this monitor
  • the committee has commented on one new instrument and one concluded instrument.
  • The new instrument that the committee has commented on is the Help to Buy program 2025. This instrument directs Housing Australia in relation to performance of its functions under the Help to Buy Act 2024 in administering the Help to Buy program. This program aims to assist eligible Australians to purchase new or existing homes by accessing an equity contribution from the Commonwealth. The committee is seeking the minister's advice regarding this instrument under a number of scrutiny principles. The instrument confers a range of broad discretionary powers on Housing Australia to administer the program. However, the relevant factors to which it must or may have regard in exercising those powers and the definition of terms central to its discretion under those powers are in fact unclear.
  • Examples of the provisions which the committee is raising concerns about include subsection 29(1) and subsection 30(1) of the instrument, which require Housing Australia to exempt a participant from complying with a requirement for participation in the scheme if it is satisfied that it is impractical for the participant to meet the relevant requirement due to circumstances, including hardship, or on other compassionate grounds. However, neither the instrument nor its explanatory statement provide factors that Housing Australia may or must have regard to in determining whether it's satisfied that circumstances exist to exempt the participant from complying with the relevant requirement.
  • Under scrutiny principle (c), the committee expects that instruments conferring broad discretionary powers should set out the matters to be considered by the decision-maker in exercising that discretion and the source of any relevant safeguards or limitations. In this instance
  • even though many of the provisions which the committee is raising concerns about are beneficial in nature, it is nonetheless expected that discretionary terms such as 'hardship' and 'on other compassionate grounds' are sufficiently explained in the explanatory statement to ensure users of the law can gain a clear understanding of the instrument and how it may affect them.
  • What decisions s hould be subject to meri t review? Repeatedly, neither the instrument nor the explanatory statement addresses whether independent merits review is available for the discretionary decisions under the instrument in line with the committee's expectations under scrutiny principle (i). Noting the potential impact which discretionary decisions may have on the rights of obligations and interests of applicants to and participants in the Help to Buy program
  • the committee is requesting the minister's advice confirming whether discretionary decisions under the instrument are subject to independent merits review and, if not, what characteristics of those decisions justify the exclusion of review by reference to the Administrative Review Council's guidance document entitled
  • The committee also considers that the instrument provides for significant elements of a regulatory scheme that are more appropriate for parliamentary enactment under scrutiny principle (j). This includes defining key terms such as 'eligible applicant' and 'eligible property', which are matters essential to determining whether a Help to Buy arrangement under the Help to Buy program can lawfully be made.
  • In addition, the committee considers that the Help to Buy program is a program of national significance. Accordingly
  • the committee is seeking the minister's advice as to why it was considered necessary and appropriate to include these significant elements of the regulatory scheme in delegated rather than primary legislation.
  • Additionally, the committee is pleased to conclude its examination of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Safety) Regulations 2024 in this monitor. This instrument aims to ensure that offshore petroleum and greenhouse gas storage activities are undertaken in a way that reduces the risks to the health and safety of persons at or near offshore petroleum and greenhouse facilities to a level as low as reasonably practicable. The committee has been engaging with the Minister for Resources since monitor 1 of 2025 in relation to several scrutiny concerns. The committee thanks the minister for her recent undertaking to amend the instrument's explanatory statement to include advice she previously provided regarding the exclusion of independent merits review and the justification for including significant penalties in delegated legislation under scrutiny principles (i) and (j).
  • This parliament, the committee is continuing to monitor the implementation of outstanding undertakings. The committee is pleased to advise that nine undertakings have been implemented in this monitor's reporting period
  • while 17 undertakings remain outstanding for more than 90 days. I advise the chamber that I will be taking the opportunity at the beginning of the parliament to write to all ministers and agency heads to inform them about the committee's work and draw their attention to all outstanding undertakings within their portfolio or department
  • noting that the committee expects such undertakings to be implemented in a timely manner.
  • I would also like to take this opportunity to continue to raise awareness of the committee's scrutiny principles and expectations outlined in Senate standing order 23. In previous tabling statements
  • I have discussed principles (a) to (d). Today I would like to discuss principle (e), which relates to clarity of drafting. Under this principle, the committee scrutinises each legislative instrument as to whether the drafting is defective or unclear. The committee is particularly concerned with instruments that contain errors or unclear drafting which are likely to affect the meaning or interpretation of the instrument or where instruments do not clearly define key terms. This is of particular concern as unclear drafting or errors may affect the meaning or interpretation of an instrument in such a way that it may prevent persons, including those directly affected by the law, from understanding their rights and obligations.
  • Under principle (e), the committee expects that instruments and explanatory statements are drafted in such a way that they are clear and intelligible to all persons and that individuals' rights and obligations are clear. Further, key terms including specialist terms and legal terms should be clearly defined in the instrument and its explanatory statement. Where the definition of a key term is sourced from other legislation, the source provision should also be cited in the instrument's explanatory statement.
  • I am pleased to note that the committee raised concerns under principle (e) a total of seven times in 2024
  • which is a decrease from 11 times in 2023. However, the committee has recently identified two instruments which contain errors in their explanatory statements which may affect the interpretation of the instruments. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to emphasise
  • at the commencement of the 48th Parliament, the importance of accurate drafting for instruments and their explanatory statements. While concerns regarding clarity of drafting and drafting errors are relatively infrequent, noting their potential to impact the interpretation and understanding of the law, the committee will continue to monitor this issue and draw attention to its expectations under principle (e).
  • If I can speak in plain Aussie straight talk: in the work that the committee does
  • we seek to make sure that Australians who are affected by the laws that we create are able to go and find out all about how the law works to be able to understand it and to be able to access the information that they need at that point to progress in the way that the law accords. That's what it's about: making sure that access to law is available and that the law is clear, particularly with regard to delegated legislation. That's our purpose. It's in service of the nation, and I'm delighted to be chair of the committee with a very illustrious group of senators alongside me to do this important work.
  • Delegated legislation monitor: monitor 4 of 2025 With these comments, I commend the committee's to the Senate.
  • Question agreed to.
• Education And Employment Legislation Committee / Government Response To Report / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 15:59, page 77 [22]
  • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 15:59 Hansard ( -- ) (): I present the government response to the report of the Education and Employment Legislation Committee on its inquiry into the provisions of the Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) Bill 2024 and seek leave to have the document incorporated into .
  • Leave granted.
  • The document read as follows --
  • Australian Government response to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee report:
  • Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) Bill 2024 [Provisions]
  • MARCH 2025
  • Committee Recommendations
  • 1. The committee recommends that the bill be passed.
  • The Australian Government accepts the recommendation. The bill passed both Houses on 26 November 2024 and received Royal Assent on 10 December 2024.
  • Greens Recommendations
  • 1. That the Australian Government amends the bill to fully fund a 25 percent wage increase for early childhood educators.
  • The Australian Government does not accept the recommendation. A phased wage increase of 10 per cent in the first year, increasing to 15 per cent in the second year is an economically responsible approach which also provides an historic pay increase for Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) educators.
  • 1. That the Australian Government invests in improving educator working conditions.
  • The Australian Government accepts the recommendation and notes the significant investments it has made to improve educator working conditions, including through this ECEC Worker Retention Payment.
  • 1. That the bill be amended to extend the wage increase beyond the sunset provision until the Fair Work Commission decision is operational.
  • The Australian Government does not accept the recommendation and notes that the ECEC Worker Retention Payment is an interim measure while the Fair Work Commission finalises its gender undervaluation review of priority awards.
  • 1. That the Australian Government commits to fully funding the Fair Work Commission decision on early childhood wages.
  • The Australian Government does not accept the recommendation and will not pre-emptively commit to future decisions of the independent Fair Work Commission.
  • 1. That the Australian Government allocate extra funding for administrative expenses associated with the workplace instrument.
  • The Australian Government notes the recommendation and is providing $10.0 million from 2024-25 for the ECEC Worker Retention Payment Engagement Program to support services to meet the requirements and conditions of the grant, including the workplace instrument.
  • 1. That the Australian Government increase transparency on grant calculations for providers in the grant guidelines.
  • The Australian Government does not accept the recommendation. The ECEC Worker Retention Payment provides funding to cover a 10 per cent wage increase for all eligible workers from 2 December 2024, an additional 5 per cent wage increase for all eligible workers from December 2025 and a minimum of an additional 20 per cent, calculated against the wage increase, for on-costs. If services do not receive sufficient funding to cover this, they may apply for a funding review.

• Consideration / Notice Paper Committee reports and government responses reserved for future debate will be listed on the .

• New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 16:02 ( -- ) (): I table the following documents:
• Particulars of proposed expenditure in respect of the year ending on 30 June 2026.
• Particulars of certain proposed expenditure in respect of the year ending on 30 June 2026.
• Particulars of proposed expenditure in relation to the parliamentary departments in respect of the year ending on 30 June 2026.
• I seek leave to move a motion in relation to the documents.
• Leave granted.
• I move:
• That the documents be referred to legislation committees for the consideration of the estimates.
• Question agreed to.
• Continue / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, page 78

• Aged Care And Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 1 min [3]
  • Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025
  • First Reading / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 16:03, page 79 [4]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 16:03 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Bills read a first time.
  • Second Reading / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 16:03, page 79 [61]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 16:03 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That these bills be now read a second time.
    • Hansard I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in .
    • Leave granted.
    • AGED CARE AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2025
    • I move that this Bill be read a second time.
    • I introduce the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025.
    • This Bill makes technical, transitional, and consequential changes to support the commencement of the Aged Care Act 2024.
    • The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety which released its expansive final report in March 2021, shocked Australians with its damning assessment of a failing aged care system.
    • The first recommendation of the Royal Commission was the development of a new Aged Care Act to put rights of older people at the centre.
    • Aged Care Act 2024 The passed the Parliament in the last term.
    • I recognise the immense contribution of my ministerial colleague, Anika Wells, now Minister for Communications, in steering these landmark reforms through the Parliament last term.
    • I also want to acknowledge that the reforms passed through the Parliament with bipartisan support, and I recognise the constructive role that the Opposition and members of the crossbench played as these reforms were considered.
    • It's a timely reminder that the wellbeing and dignity of older people, and the importance of delivering respectful and person-centred care, should be above politics.
    • The Aged Care Act 2024, which commences on 1 November 2025, which replaces the Aged Care Act 1997, will deliver on this recommendation and establish a new rights-based framework for the delivery of aged care in Australia.
    • The new legislative framework follows so many other improvements, including:
    • 24/7 nursing in aged care homes, with a registered nurse onsite in aged care more than 99% of the time
    • Mandatory care minutes, with an additional 6.8 million minutes of care provided every single day
    • $17.7 billion investment in higher wages for aged care workers
    • around 306,000 people accessing a Home Care Package today, compared to under 200,000 people 5 years ago.
    • The new Act puts the dignity of older Australians first and foremost with the statement of rights. Underpinned by Australia's obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
    • It is important we get this once-in-a-generation reform right.
    • That's why the Government chose to defer the start of the Aged Care Act 2024, and the new Support at Home program. As we said when the deferral was announced, the Government decided it was appropriate to give more time for aged care providers to prepare their clients, support their workforce and get their systems ready for changes.
    • This Bill provides further support for our ambition to transform the experience of older Australians receiving care.
    • The Bill also includes amendments to the Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Act 2024 and other legislation that supports the aged care system.
    • Aged Care Act 2024 Chapter 4 amendments
    • The Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 makes a number of transitional changes to ensure that subsidies are paid correctly to support the provision of funded aged care to older Australians.
    • Older Australians are now receiving an additional 6.8 million minutes of care every single day -- 2.5 million of which are delivered by qualified, registered nurses. Care minutes and related measures were introduced in response to a recommendation of the Royal Commission to ensure older people in aged care homes receive the dedicated care time they need. Amendments to provider-based subsidy provisions ensure that registered providers are supported to deliver this high-quality care while maintaining a sustainable aged care system.
    • The Bill also contains amendments to support the continuation of accommodation bond arrangements, which are amounts paid to enter and receive care in a residential setting made under the 1997 Act, for people who entered care before 2008.
    • The amendments also include a new civil penalty provision comparable to the existing accommodation payments framework under the new Act.
    • Miscellaneous changes
    • The new Act provided for automated processes to support decisions about classification levels, prioritisation and allocation of places to individuals.
    • Updated automation provisions are included in this Bill which reflect best practice for transparency and clarity. The updated provisions will support means testing arrangements under the new framework for financial contributions. This will allow the system to remain efficient and keep pace with technological advances and ensure that older Australians get quicker and more robust decisions.
    • The protection of personal information and the regulation of its use and disclosure, consistent with both Australian law and international standards, remains a key priority. Under the new Act framework, this information is protected information, and the Act provides substantial penalties for misuse.
    • Amendments in this Bill ensure this information is clearly transitioned from the old framework to the new framework with no confusion as to when and how authorisations to use or disclose this information, for a proper purpose, apply.
    • Amendments are also being made to the Star Ratings program. The introduction of this program has given older Australians and their loved ones more information about residential aged care homes. But based on public consultation and feedback amendments will be made to better utilise compliance information in determining and publishing a registered provider's compliance with their obligations under the law.
    • This new Bill also introduces a requirement that the Aged Care Quality Standards are reviewed every five years, to ensure that the standards of care we expect for older Australians are regularly considered against and aligned with best practice.
    • Consequential amendments
    • The Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 will make consequential changes to legislation that reference the Commonwealth aged care system. These amendments will ensure that funded aged care services are provided in a manner consistent with other Commonwealth legislation. Amendments will ensure that existing exemptions to the application of the GST remain in place for aged care services. Amendments to the treatment of means testing and income support payments will ensure they continue to operate as intended. Specifically, that aged care accommodation payments and certain compensation payments are not considered income, and that certain exemptions continue to apply to payments made to injured veterans.
    • Concluding remarks
    • To conclude, this bill builds on the new and enduring foundation for the Australian aged-care system from 1 November 2025, and for years to come.
    • I would like to thank the many people who have contributed to this ambitious reform to date.
    • In particular, I would like to thank:
    • The Members of the Aged Care Council of Elders
    • The National Aged Care Advisory Council
    • Members of the Aged Care Transition Taskforce and the
    • The Department of Health, Disability and Ageing's expert advisory panel, consumer and sector reference groups
    • Last but not least thank you to the older Australians, carers, workers, unions, providers, advocates and other experts who continue to contribute to an aged care system that puts people first.
    • I hope the Parliament will come together to support this Bill, to help realise the full potential of these critical aged care reforms.
    • I commend the Bill to the House.
    • AGED CARE (ACCOMMODATION PAYMENT SECURITY) LEVY AMENDMENT BILL 2025
    • I move that this Bill be read a second time.
    • I introduce the Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025.
    • This Bill is a counterpart to the Bill I introduced before this, and complements the provisions it contains.
    • Aged Care Act 2024 This Bill makes additional technical, transitional, and consequential changes to support the commencement of the new .
    • Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Act 2006 This Bill makes consequential amendments to which guarantees certain payments made by older Australians who seek to access funded aged care.
    • It does so in two main ways. First, it ensures that registered providers under the new Act framework continue to be subject to the Government's guarantee scheme.
    • Secondly, it provides that the Government may levy the costs of this guarantee from certain classes of registered providers in certain circumstances, such as when there is a default event.
    • This Bill is an important measure to ensure that funded aged care services remain sustainable, and payments made by older Australians remain protected into the future.
    • I commend the Bill to the House.
    • Ordered that further consideration of the second reading of these bills be adjourned to the first sitting day of the next period of sittings, in accordance with standing order 111.
• Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 1 min [3]
  • Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025 Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025
  • First Reading / Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, 16:04, page 81 1 min [4]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 16:04 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Bills read a first time.
  • Second Reading / Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, 16:05, page 81 [95]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 16:05 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That these bills be now read a second time.
    • Hansard I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in .
    • Leave granted.
    • The speeches read as follows --
    • AUSTRALIAN SECURITY INTELLIGENCE ORGANISATION AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 1) 2025
    • The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025 extends the sunset date of ASIO's compulsory questioning powers by 18 months, until 7 March 2027. This extension will enable the Government to progress reforms to ASIO's questioning powers, and ensure the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) has sufficient time to consider those reforms.
    • In September 2023, the PJCIS elected to review the compulsory questioning framework ahead of its sunset date, but did not complete its review prior to the prorogation of Parliament earlier this year. This Bill will ensure ASIO retains these important powers to investigate and gather critical intelligence while reforms to the framework are progressed through Parliament, including consideration by the PJCIS.
    • Closing remarks
    • I would note that this Bill ensures that ASIO continues to have the powers it needs to navigate an increasingly complex, challenging and changing security environment and deliver on its mission to protect the safety of Australia and Australians. The regime will continue to be subject to extensive safeguards and oversight mechanisms to protect individual rights, including oversight by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security.
    • The Bill reflects this Government's commitment to ensuring Australia's national security agencies have the powers they need to ensure that Australians can be safe, and feel safe, in an increasingly complex national security environment.
    • DEFENCE HOUSING AUSTRALIA AMENDMENT BILL 2025
    • Defence Housing Australia Act 1987 I am pleased to present the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, which makes various amendments to the to expand the main function of Defence Housing Australia (DHA). The changes will enable housing and housing-related services to be provided by DHA to those making important contributions to the defence of Australia.
    • DHA was established in 1987 for the purpose of providing Australian Defence Force (ADF) members and their families with quality, affordable and readily accessible housing. This housing initiative was and still is a key element of ADF conditions of service, which contributes directly to the retention and wellbeing of ADF personnel.
    • This Bill addresses the recommendation from a 2019 ANAO Report on the management of DHA. The report recommended expanding DHA's functions to also provide housing for foreign exchange and visiting military personnel, and philanthropic organisations that provide counselling and other support services to ADF members and their families.
    • This Bill recognises that the ADF, in modern times, relies on the support, services and cooperation of a wide range of external partners and organisations, including foreign militaries, who may require housing support in Australia.
    • In particular, this Bill will directly support our requirement to house personnel coming to Australia as part of Submarine Rotational Force -- West under the Australia, United Kingdom and the United States trilateral security partnership -- AUKUS.
    • Submarine Rotational Force-West is part of the AUKUS Optimal Pathway, which was announced in March 2023.
    • The AUKUS Optimal Pathway will:
    • Deliver Australia a conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability as soon as the early 2030s;
    • Elevate all three nations' industrial capacity to produce and sustain advanced and interoperable nuclear-powered submarines for decades to come; and
    • Expand our individual and collective force posture in the Indo-Pacific and contribute to global security and stability in the region.
    • Stirling, The first phase of the AUKUS Optimal Pathway includes the rotational presence of US and UK nuclear-powered submarines at HMAS known as the Submarine Rotational Force -- West (SRF-West).
    • From Quarter 3, 2025, a small cohort of approximately 34 US personnel will arrive in Western Australia to prepare for the commencement of the SRF-West. Following this, there will be an increasing number of US and UK military, civilian and contractor personnel arriving in Western Australia over the course of five years, including some families accompanying US military personnel.
    • Stirling To enable the activity, Defence, through DHA, needs to ensure that housing for these US and UK personnel is available in close proximity to HMAS .
    • SRF-West is integral to helping Australia and Australians develop the skills and infrastructure to safely and securely maintain, own and operate nuclear-powered submarines.
    • Providing housing and family support to these personnel while they reside in Western Australia is a critical aspect of enabling SRF-West. Housing stock will be made available through DHA. This will be comparable to the support provided to ADF members and their families.
    • The Albanese Government is committed to AUKUS and supporting our AUKUS partners appropriately, however we are conscious this should not be at the detriment of local communities.
    • Further, in the spirit of a true partnership, the Albanese Government seeks to ensure overseas personnel are integrated into local communities in order to provide them and their families the best possible experience in Australia.
    • Utilising DHA will ensure Australia secures adequate and suitable housing that aligns with Australian Defence Force standards while limiting any negative impacts that may be had on local housing markets.
    • More generally, there is a need in a range of circumstances to provide housing to people in locations where Defence operates across Australia, including remote areas, to deliver Defence capability.
    • This Bill will also enable DHA to provide housing and housing-related services to organisations who are integral to Defence business, including philanthropic organisations providing important support services.
    • The Bill will also provide a mechanism for the Minister for Defence Personnel to determine that DHA can provide housing and housing-related services in the future to broader categories of people to meet the operational needs of the ADF and the requirements of the Department of Defence. This allows for flexibility and the ability to respond to changing circumstances, as and when they arise.
    • This recognises the changing nature of the Defence workforce, which no longer exclusively encompasses ADF members and APS employees.
    • Ultimately, this Bill will ensure that Australia's security requirements are met.
    • The speedy passage of this legislation is an important step in ensuring we can meet our commitments under AUKUS.
    • These amendments will also enable better support for those who provide assistance and support to the ADF.
    • I commend the Bill.
    • HEALTH INSURANCE (PATHOLOGY) (FEES) (REPEAL) BILL 2025
    • The Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025 relates to the fees imposed on the pathology sector for certain categories of pathology applications. This Bill provides reforms for the current charging arrangements imposed on the sector for categories of accreditation applications.
    • Health Insurance Act 1973 Under the , pathology services must be rendered by or on behalf of an Approved Pathology Practitioner (Approved Practitioner), in an Accredited Pathology Laboratory (Accredited Laboratory) operated by an Approved Pathology Authority (Approved Authority,) to be eligible to receive Medicare benefits.
    • Practitioners (pathologists) are required to sign an undertaking to the Minister that they will comply with the requirements of the legislation and certain administrative arrangements. They must pay an acceptance fee to become an Approved Practitioner. Similarly, the proprietor of a laboratory must sign an undertaking and pay an acceptance fee to become an Approved Authority. Laboratory premises may be approved by the Minister as an Accredited Laboratory following the submission of an application and relevant supporting documentation. This includes an accreditation assessment and payment of the accreditation fee once the premises are provided with an in-principle approval.
    • The accreditation requirements impose obligations on Approved Practitioners, Accredited Laboratories and Approved Authorities to undertake to meet, or demonstrate compliance with, quality assurance standards for pathology services provided under Medicare.
    • Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) Act 1991 The (Pathology Fees Act) specifies the fees which must be paid for the acceptance, and approval of, applications for the Approved Practitioner, Approved Authority and Accredited Laboratory. This allows approved providers to be identified in the Services Australia billing system of Medicare eligible services. These fees were arbitrarily set to be between $500 and $2,500 in 1991.
    • The 2022 Health Portfolio Charging Review identified that the fees set against each of these application categories have not been reviewed or changed since the Pathology Fees Act came into force. Further, when investigated, the fees were found to exceed the administrative cost of processing these application categories. As such, this arrangement does not align with the Australian Government Charging Framework (2015).
    • Removing the fees applied to the three categories of applications through the repeal of the Pathology Fees Act will resolve this misalignment with Government Charging Policy. It will provide fee relief in addition to reducing the administrative burden for the pathology sector.
    • The consequential amendments included in this Bill remove all references to the payment of fees for these application types from 1 July 2025. In line with this intended commencement date, provisions have been included to allow the refund of fees collected between 1 July 2025 (inclusive) and the commencement date of this bill where the applicant's approval has come into force on or after 1 July 2025.
    • To preserve the high level of confidence in the accuracy of pathology testing in Australia provided under Medicare, the administrative requirements including accreditation obligations will remain unchanged.
    • PACIFIC BANKING GUARANTEE BILL 2025
    • I move that this Bill be now read a second time.
    • Today I am proud to re-introduce the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025.
    • This Bill will help secure access to banking services across the Pacific.
    • It will help ensure our entire region can stay connected to the global financial system.
    • Australia's relationship with the Pacific is a special one.
    • Since coming to office, the Albanese Labor Government has been working hard to be a partner of choice with the entire region.
    • We've been restoring trust and rebuilding relationships.
    • Within our first 12 months in office, Albanese government ministers visited every Pacific Islands Forum member country.
    • To renew our Pacific partnerships, listen to Pacific priorities and deliver on our collective interests.
    • We've been making record investments, and we are the region's largest development partner.
    • I pay tribute to the work of the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, Trade Minister and Minister for Pacific Island Affairs.
    • When it comes to banking in the Pacific, the challenges in front of us are clear, and confronting.
    • We know the Pacific has seen the fastest withdrawal of correspondent banking services of any region in the world.
    • We know these vital services help communities access foreign currencies and international payment systems.
    • And we also know that without them, large parts of the Pacific risk being cut off from the global financial system.
    • At stake here is the ability of the Pacific to engage with the world.
    • This pressing challenge was one of the main topics discussed with counterparts at the Pacific Islands Forum Economic Ministers Meeting last year.
    • That marked the first time an Australian Treasurer had travelled to the Pacific to attend that forum in almost two decades.
    • It's also the challenge this Bill helps tackle.
    • This legislation allows the Commonwealth to use its balance sheet to support Australian banks to maintain their Pacific operations.
    • It will enable the Commonwealth to guarantee an Australian banks' business in the Pacific -- either directly or through its subsidiaries -- against the unlikely possibility of a default in the region, which may force them to shut their operations.
    • Eligible Australian banks will pay a fee to the Commonwealth for the guarantee, it is not a subsidy.
    • It is highly unlikely this guarantee will be needed.
    • But it is still an important and necessary change to make sure our Pacific family can continue to bank with confidence.
    • This legislation is just one part of the substantial progress we've already made to secure the future of banking services in the region.
    • Working with the Commonwealth Bank to establish banking operations in Nauru this year.
    • Working with ANZ and Westpac to secure their continued presence in the Pacific.
    • Working with the World Bank and Asian Development Bank to develop digital identity infrastructure and improve compliance with regulations.
    • And funding our Attorney-General's Department to help build capacity in Pacific countries, to strengthen protections from financial crime and build trust in the system.
    • We've been able to make all this progress at the same time as also securing access to banking services around Australia.
    • Because of our efforts, all major banks now have a moratorium on branch closures in regional Australia for two and a half years.
    • And we've helped secure a number of new agreements to shore up the vital services provided by Bank@Post.
    • We are standing up for regional Australians, helping to secure the banking services they need and deserve.
    • More than banking, this is about keeping regional communities, that contribute so much to our national economy, connected and thriving.
    • Banks have a responsibility to regional communities and we're holding them to it.
    • We will continue to work with regulators, industry and communities to ensure our regions have access to fit-for purpose and sustainable banking services over the long term.
    • This includes a focus on sustainable cash distribution and ensuring Australians can use cash to pay for essentials if they want or need to.
    • This Bill will help prevent the loss of banking services in the Pacific, which is vital to the security and economic development of our region.
    • But it won't solve the challenge overnight.
    • We'll continue to work with the banks and our international partners to address this issue.
    • To make our region safer and more stable.
    • To make sure loved ones, families and communities can continue to access their money.
    • And to build a better future for the people of the Pacific.
    • Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.
    • Ordered that further consideration of the second reading of these bills be adjourned to the first sitting day of the next period of sittings, in accordance with standing order 111.
    • Notice Paper Ordered that the bills be listed on the as separate orders of the day.

• Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee
• Human Rights Joint Committee
• Law Enforcement Joint Committee
• National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee
• Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee
• Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee
• Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee
• Migration Joint Committee
• National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee
• National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee
• Northern Australia Joint Committee
• Parliamentary Library Joint Committee
• Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee
• Treaties Joint Committee
• Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee
• Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee
• Public Works Joint Committee
• Corporations and Financial Services Joint Committee Human Rights Joint Committee Law Enforcement Joint Committee National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee Electoral Matters Joint Committee Foreign Affairs
• Defence and Trade Joint Committee Implementation of the National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee Migration Joint Committee National Capital and External Territories Joint Committee National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee Northern Australia Joint Committee Parliamentary Library Joint Committee Trade and Investment Growth Joint Committee Treaties Joint Committee Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee Public Accounts and Audit Joint Committee
• Membership [17]
  • Messages received from the House of Representatives informing the Senate of the appointment of Ms Jarrett, Ms Lawrence, Mr Moncrieff, Mr Hamilton and Mr Violi to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services; Dr Freelander
  • Mr Holzberger, Ms Mascarenhas, Mr Rebello and Dr M Ryan to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights; Mr Abdo
  • Mrs Elliot, Mr Repacholi, Mr Batt and Mr L O'Brien to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement; Dr Garland
  • Ms J Ryan, Ms Thwaites, Mr Conaghan and Dr Haines to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Anti-Corruption Commission; Ms Chesters
  • Ms J Ryan and Ms Stanley to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Parliamentary Standards; Ms K Cook
  • Mr Lim, Ms Scrymgour, Mr M Smith, Mr Chaffey and Mr Venning to the Joint Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs; Ms Campbell
  • Mr Laxale, Mr Neumann, Ms Payne, Mr Caldwell and Mr R Wilson to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters; Ms Clutterham
  • Mr Georganas, Mr Gosling, Ms Jarrett, Mr Lim, Mr Neumann, Ms Payne, Mrs Phillips, Ms Templeman, Ms Thwaites, Mr Watts, Mr Zappia, Mr Batt, Mr Boyce, Mr Hamilton, Mr McCormack, Mr Rebello, Ms Spender, Mr Thompson and Mr Wallace to the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs
  • Defence and Trade; Ms Belyea, Ms Coffey, Dr Reid, Ms McKenzie and Mr L O'Brien to the Joint Standing Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme; Ms Fernando
  • Mr Georganas, Ms Miller-Frost, Mr Caldwell, Ms Le and Mr Pike to the Joint Standing Committee on Migration; Ms Claydon
  • Ms Coffey, Mr Gosling, Ms Payne, Mr Caldwell and Mr Pike to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories; Ms Berry
  • Ms Coker, Mrs Elliot, Ms Le and Mr Thompson to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme; Mr Gosling
  • Ms Scrymgour, Mr M Smith, Mr Thompson and Mr Willcox to the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia; Ms Fernando
  • Mr French, Dr Reid, Ms Stanley, Mr Pasin and Mr Small to the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library; Ms Briskey
  • Mr Georganas, Mr Lim, Ms Sharkie and Mr R Wilson to the Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth; Ms Briskey
  • Ms Chesters, Ms Clutterham, Ms Lawrence, Mr Watts, Mr Zappia, Ms McKenzie, Ms Penfold and Mr Pike to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties; Mr Batt and Mr Pike to the Joint Committee on the Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings; Ms Aldred
  • Mr Joyce, Mr Kennedy and Mr Young to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit; and Mr Willcox and Mr R Wilson to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works.
• Education And Employment Legislation Committee
• Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• Education and Employment Legislation Committee Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• Membership [2]
  • Polley, Sen Helen (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Tasmania, ALP, 16:05, page 86 / ( Senator Polley ) 16:05 (): The President has received letters nominating senators to be members of various committees.
  • Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, 16:05, page 86 [13]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 16:05 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move:
    • That senators be discharged from and appointed to committees as follows:
    • Education and Employment Legislation Committee --
    • Appointed --
    • Substitute member: Senator Barbara Pocock to replace Senator Faruqi for the committee's inquiry into the provisions of the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025.
    • Participating member: Senator Faruqi
    • Electoral Matters -- Joint Standing Committee --
    • Appointed -- Participating member [for the purposes of the committee's inquiry into the 2025 election]: Senator Babet
    • Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy -- Select Committee --
    • Appointed --
    • Senators Ananda-Rajah and Darmanin
    • Participating members: Senators Brown, Ciccone, Cox, Dolega, Dowling, Ghosh, Grogan, Mulholland, O'Neill, Polley, Sheldon, Marielle Smith, Sterle, Stewart, Walker and Whiteaker
    • Question agreed to.

• Ruston, Sen Anne, South Australia, LP, 16:06, page 86 15 min [28]
  • South Australia Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 16:06 ( -- ) (): I move general business notice of motion No. 73:
  • That the Senate --
  • (a) notes that the Prime Minister promised 71 times to Australians that 'all you need is your Medicare card, not a credit card' and that it would be 'free to see a GP';
  • (b) notes that, despite the Prime Minister's promise, according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare:
  • (i) while the Prime Minister was busy waving around his Medicare card claiming it is all you need to see a doctor, Australians have forked out almost $2 billion to see a GP in the past year,
  • (ii) in May 2025 alone, during the election campaign, Australians paid a staggering $166 million in combined out-of-pocket costs, and
  • (iii) Australians need their credit cards more and more, as well as their Medicare card, to see a GP under Labor;
  • (c) condemns the Prime Minister for not being truthful with Australians during the Federal Election campaign; and
  • (d) calls on the Prime Minister to admit that he misled Australians about Medicare.
  • Today, I stand to speak on the general business motion that I have moved in this place. I moved this motion because of my extraordinary concern about the Prime Minister and the government misleading Australians about a crisis befalling our healthcare system at the moment, most particularly a crisis in access to general practice, which is access to primary care. I say this -- and I'll provide evidence as to why I'm concerned -- because during the election campaign the Prime Minister, the leader of our nation, promised Australians that all you need is your Medicare card, not your credit card, when you visit your doctor. He also said it would be free to see a GP. After he made that commitment to Australians -- 71 times at least that we can identify -- Australians quite rightly expect that, when they see their GP, they will not have any out-of-pocket expenses. That means, when they go to see the GP, they will provide their Medicare card, and that will be the only card that they require.
  • However, we knew all along this was unlikely to be achieved. We remained very concerned throughout the campaign while the government, particularly the Prime Minister, in his shady stunts, was running around, wielding his plastic card as if somehow that was going to be his whole platform for winning the election. We constantly said throughout the campaign that we believed the Prime Minister was misleading Australians and giving them a false sense that their health care was about to become free. Australians know, as they have experienced it over the last three years in particular, about how much costs for accessing their GP have gone up. In fact, they have gone up on average by 45 per cent; the out-of-pocket costs of going to see a GP have risen.
  • Immediately following the election we found out, on the incoming government brief, that the Department of Health and Aged Care advised the Prime Minister and advised the government prior to the election that, in fact, there was no possibility every person would be able to see their GP for free. That FOI identified that, even on the conservative estimates of the Department of Health and Aged Care, the department believed that a quarter of GP clinics across Australia will not bulk-bill, despite the Australian Labor Party government's promises to Australians during the election campaign.
  • This data shows that millions of Australians will still need their credit card, something that the Prime Minister promised them they would not need. So, quite clearly, the Prime Minister's own Department of Health, Disability and Ageing has actually belled the cat on the fact that he not only misled Australians during the election campaign but did so knowingly. But, as I said, the worst part of it is that not only did he mislead Australians about how much money they were going to have to pull out of their own pockets when they go to see a GP; right now, that amount is higher than it has ever been before.
  • But the other telling thing was, this week, the Minister for Health and Ageing, Mark Butler, on morning television, said:
  • We never said there'd be a hundred per cent bulk billing.
  • What I'd really like to understand from the Prime Minister is how, if all you need to visit your doctor is your Medicare card, that cannot mean you're telling the Australian public that they will get their primary health care for free. How is saying, 'It will be free to see a GP,' not telling Australians that every Australian will get to see their GP for free? The Prime Minister knew it wasn't true. He knew it wasn't true when he was saying it. He knows it's not true now. He continues to say it, and yet his very own health minister is quite happy to admit that what the Prime Minister is saying was never actually true.
  • Quite clearly, what this tells us is that we have a prime minister who is prepared to use a disingenuous stunt that he knows to be not true in order to win an election. He is prepared to use something as important as Australians' affordable access to primary care as a stunt in order to win an election. I think this reflects incredibly badly on the Australian Prime Minister.
  • The reality is that, while the Prime Minister has been wandering around and waving his Medicare card, in May 2025 alone -- that's the first month of the new government's reign; this is not in the previous term but after the Prime Minister had made his promise to Australians -- Australians forked out $166 million in out-of-pocket costs when they saw their GPs. In the first month of this government's reign, after that promise, not only have we got the department of health saying it's not possible; we actually have the facts that say, at a time when we've got a cost-of-living crisis and Australians are struggling to meet the costs of everyday life, Australians had to fork out $166 million -- hardworking taxpayers' money -- despite the Prime Minister telling them that they weren't going to have to pay anything at all. And, in fact, last year it was $2 billion in out-of-pocket expenses. That is the Prime Minister's $2 billion lie. Quite clearly, the facts are the facts, and creating a false expectation amongst Australians at a time when they are under immense financial pressure is not only disingenuous; it's, quite frankly, cruel.
  • We knew already that this prime minister couldn't be trusted when it came to Medicare. But quite clearly he's prepared to say and do anything to cover the abject failings of our healthcare system as we stand here today. By absolutely every metric, the Albanese Labor government failed Australians on healthcare in the first three-year term of their government. I hope they don't do it in the next three years, but I fear they probably will, because they're much more interested in headlines than they are in actually delivering for Australians.
  • You say, 'Why do I say that they have failed on every metric?' Despite what the Labor Party will tell you -- because quite clearly they're happy to tell you anything to cover up their failings -- bulk-billing has fallen from over 88 per cent to 77 per cent in the three years that they've been in government. They'll say to you, 'But those figures were inflated, because, of course, they were figures as we were coming out of COVID.' Well, let's disregard the COVID figures. In 2019, bulk-billing rates were 86 per cent, and they're now 77 per cent. From pre-COVID till now -- bulk-billing rates plummeted nine per cent in that time but 11 per cent in the first three years of this government's term.
  • The other thing is that, as I said, out-of-pocket costs have never, ever been higher. There has been a 45 per cent increase in out-of-pocket costs over those three years. So that means Australians are paying more out of their pocket than they have ever paid before when they go to visit a doctor. It doesn't matter how many times the Labor Party comes in here and tells you a story about how wonderful everything is. Australians know the difference, because they feel it every time they go to their doctor. They feel it in their hip pockets.
  • But more egregious than that -- more egregious than the fact that they're having to fork out so much more when they go to see their doctor, despite the promises of those opposite -- is that 1.5 million Australians last year chose not to see their doctor because they said they couldn't afford to do it. They made the very difficult decision of not seeing the doctor because they had other pressures on their family budget -- pressures about putting food on the table, paying the mortgage, filling up the car with fuel, paying for their insurance and paying for the stuff that their kids needed when they went to school. Those were the decisions that Australians had to make. They forwent going to a doctor because they had to make those very difficult decisions about how they were going to spend their money. And, as a result of not seeing their doctor, Australians got sicker. We have seen increased pressure on our emergency departments and we have seen ramping accelerate in every state and territory around the country. Not only does that mean that Australians are getting sicker, so it's very bad for Australians; it also means that, by the time they go to see a doctor, the cost to our healthcare system and our hospitals is so much higher, when it could have been prevented if they'd simply had access to their GP.
  • So, as I said, we've seen an increase in ramping, an increase in emergency presentations, an increase in out-of-pocket costs, an increase in people not seeing the doctor and bulk-billing rates falling. I don't know how this government can congratulate itself on health. They should put down their smokescreen, they should put down their disingenuous stunts, and they should actually accept the fact that we have a challenge and a crisis in our primary-care system and in our healthcare system and that we should be addressing that. Don't pretend it doesn't exist, because that won't solve the problem.
  • The government's very good at making sure that all they do is denigrate the record of the coalition. Well, let me put it on the record tonight. The disgraceful scare campaigns that have been run by those opposite for the last three elections actually fly in the face of the facts. Funding to Medicare under the coalition government increased every single year, from $18.6 billion when Labor left government in 2012-13 to more than $30 billion in 2021-22 when we were in government. Significantly, bulk-billing was much, much higher when we were in government. It consistently rose the entire time that we were in government.
  • The other point that's worth making -- despite those opposite once again telling the Australian public things that are not correct about the coalition's track record on the PBS -- is that we are proud supporters of Australians getting access to affordable medicines. We want Australians to get access to cheaper medicines. In fact, we listed 2,900 new or amended medicines during our time in government. We made a commitment that, if the process through the TGA and PBAC approved a medication, we would list it on the PBS. The last time the Labor Party were in government, back in 2012, they stopped listing medicines on the PBS because, by their own admission, they had run out of money to do so. That is in stark contrast to the absolute commitment from the coalition government during its time to make sure that all medications approved by PBAC were listed on the PBS.
  • What we saw in the last term of this government, despite the fact this government claims that it's the best friend of our healthcare system, was that they were the ones who, for the very first time, put a cap on the number of medicines that could be listed for a PBAC meeting. In effect, this is another backhanded way of not listing medications that might otherwise have been listed -- because, if you can't get it onto the PBAC agenda, it can't be approved by PBAC, so therefore you don't have to list it. So this government continuing to perpetuate its scare campaigns and misinformation and to try to rewrite history and change the facts does not hide the fact that, by every single measure, the Albanese Labor government has been the worst government for Australian's health in history.
  • In conclusion, there is one other element of our healthcare system that I'd like to draw attention to, and that is the absolute epidemic that we have at the moment in relation to mental health. What this government did in its last term of government, in the three years from 2022 to 2025, is it got rid of the Mental Health Commission and it did not renew the funding for national suicide prevention research. They managed to chase the head of Mental Health Australia out of his position. He ended up giving up being the chair because he said that it was a pointless exercise because the Prime Minister was not listening to Australians who had challenges with mental health and was complete disregarding the sector.
  • (Time expired) This government, the Albanese Labor government, has failed Australians on health care and failed Australians when it comes to their mental health. And, yet, to this day, as we're standing in this parliament, they are still prepared to come in here, ask questions in question time, do an address in reply and make speeches that continue to perpetuate the lies. It must stop.
• Steele-John, Sen Jordon, Western Australia, AG, 16:21, page 88 16 min [10]
  • Western Australia 16:21 () (): In contributing to this debate this evening, I'm going to tackle three key areas of health care which people in the community have said to me are urgent priorities. We must recognise that people in our community are struggling through a cost-of-living crisis, struggling to keep the roof over their heads, struggling to afford the weekly shop -- and, yes, struggling to be able to access the health care that they urgently need.
  • First, let us look clearly at this question of access to general practice, of being able to go and see your GP. If you cannot access a GP when you need it because of cost, there are so many negative health consequences. In my home state of Western Australia, the average out-of-pocket cost for a 20-minute GP appointment is $42.66. Now, to some in here that might sound like not too much. Why are people complaining? Why is that a struggle? If you're a shadow minister, a minister or even an assistant minister, that might just pass off the top of your bank account, and you wouldn't even notice. Well, for most people in the community, for most people in WA, that amount of money is just not doable, not if you are also balancing feeding your kids or paying the rent, or cobbling together enough for the mortgage. You just can't do it.
  • While it is welcome that the government has introduced bulk-billing incentives, what we see from the Cleanbill report is that what has been done so far is not enough, that about 750 clinics are estimated to have actually increased their rate of bulk-billing. That is nowhere near enough to get to the target of enabling people to see the GP using their Medicare card, which was what was promised at the election -- nowhere near enough. So people in my home state are continuing to go without the access to the health care that they need. And they cannot make up the difference between their weekly expenses and paying those prices by making some papier-mache objects to sell, using the press releases that this government put out during the election -- and still puts out now -- congratulating themselves on what a great job they've done.
  • People cannot pay their GP using the self-satisfaction of this government nor does it help anyone to sit and listen to a debate where the Liberal Party -- who have had a great time this week, eating themselves alive in front of the entire parliament -- disingenuously claim that, if they were still in government, Medicare would be better. Give us a break! If you want to join in at this time and be genuinely interested in building the healthcare system in this country, then good. It's about time. And, if you over there, in the Labor Party, want to actually get yourself off your high horse for being part of Medicare's establishment decades ago and actually engage with the reality of the people who need health care and who live and die on the question of whether or not their services are bulk-billed or whether or not they can get to see a doctor, then it's about time. Join in with the rest of us that are actually responding to the community demand for action.
  • The ability to see the GP for free for everyone -- that is what is demanded. That is what is needed. That is what the Greens went to the election proposing to establish. And before anyone asks any questions about how it might have been paid for -- by making big gas corporations pay their fair share of tax. Now, if you did that, you may not be invited to be on the board of Woodside or BHP after you end your political career, but I would hope that you would be able to sleep a bit better at night knowing that you put your community first.
  • We are at a moment in time in 2025 where our healthcare system does not recognise the fact that the mouth is part of the body. Dental care is excluded from Medicare. That makes no sense at all. The Greens have long advocated for the establishment of a universal dental system so that people can live free of dental pain and free of gum disease, and where people can once again eat the foods they used to, so they could be saved from the experiences of diabetes, heart disease and dementia, which we know are so deeply related to poor dental and oral health. I was very proud to lead a parliamentary inquiry in the last parliament that explored, in great detail, what it would actually mean to establish universal access to dental care in Australia. It is clear to anyone looking that this is a change whose time has come. Maybe there are those in this parliament that are not ready to come all the way with the Greens to a space where we have universal access for all in our community. But let us begin.
  • Between 2010 and 2013, the Greens were able to work -- thanks to the support of the community -- across the parliament to establish the Child Dental Benefits Schedule. We could expand that scheme to cover all children. We could implement the recommendations of the aged-care royal commission and establish a seniors' dental benefit scheme so that those older Australians who are right now living in perpetual agony, unable to eat the foods that they love and unable to smile without fear of causing fear, could actually live with hope and free of pain again. We could finally close the absurd loophole in Australian cancer rehabilitative treatment which sees every other part of rehabilitative cancer treatment and care covered by Medicare except that related to the mouth, to the teeth, to the gums -- the maxillofacial loophole. Let us begin, because people need access to dental and oral health care. They cannot continue to bear the pain, to bear the weight and the burden of having to burrow into their retirement savings, having to siphon off their super to fix their teeth. This isn't okay. This isn't fair or just. Let us get this done.
  • Finally, in the context of some of the debates we've had this week that have been so hurtful and so unnecessary towards members of our community who are trans and queer folks, let us work together to make sure that Medicare and the healthcare system fully supports trans people, provides what is needed to trans folks to live with pride and dignity, and puts a great big barrier between people's individual health care and the bigoted views of politicians who would seek to whip up hate and fear. It is hard enough being a queer person in this country, a trans person in this country, living every day knowing that you will experience discrimination and you will experience exclusion as much as, if not more than, you will experience love and inclusion, without worrying that the health care that you need will not be accessible, will not exist at all in your community, or will be subject to so many bureaucratic, nonsense, paper-pushing processes that you won't even get it in time. In my state of WA, the situation we have right now with trans health care is a shame. It's a shame on the state government and it's a shame on the federal government. It is so unnecessary and causing so much harm. It's not okay.
  • Let us work together to build a healthcare system that actually meets the needs of the community. It is not good enough for politicians in this place to set their standard of success at the level of ambition that they personally believe is good enough. We must set our level of ambition and we must judge ourselves against the extent to which we meet the needs of the community, the actual needs of the people who send us here. The resources to do it are there if we would but take them. If we could find in ourselves and in our positions of power the courage to confront powerful vested interests and corporate influence, then we would find enough resources to get this done. Not only would we find enough resources to get it done; we would not have to be in an absurd situation where a government elected on a platform of supporting disabled people in our community turns around, as this Labor government has done, and decides to implement cuts to the very National Disability Insurance Scheme it promised it would preserve.
  • (Time expired) Today I tabled a petition from 60,000 people who do not and will not cop the cuts from this government to our NDIS that risk the removal of the vital allied health supports, the support coordinators and the plan managers. They will not cop it and will not be silent. They understand the connection between disability supports and Medicare. They understand the commitment that those who sought to keep the Liberals out of power made at the election, and they understand that if you do not intend to keep your word, then there will be electoral consequences for you and your party. But before we get anywhere near that place, at the beginning of this parliament let us come together around some of the most basic opportunities for progress and change -- getting dental care into Medicare for seniors, for kids and for those recovering from cancer.
• Ayres, Sen Tim, New South Wales, ALP, 16:37, page 90 1 min [4]
  • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 16:37 ( -- ) (): Following the Treasurer's injunction in terms of productivity, the amount of hours that we engage in work here and the output -- we've had a very good week in terms of legislative outcomes for the government -- I don't propose to make a contribution on this matter, and I understand that there are no further speakers. As it is after 4.30, the advice that we're getting is that we'll need to go to a deferred vote on this question. 1 min
  • ( Senator Polley ): The question is that the motion moved by Senator Ruston be agreed to. A division is required. As it is after 4.30, this division will be held over to the next day of meeting, which is 25 August.
  • Senate adjourned at 16:38
  • Interjection / Polley, Sen Helen (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Tasmania, ALP, page 90

• HrefRaw: Chamber
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/Chamber
• CandidateSid: Chamber
• AnchorText: Thursday, 31 July 2025
• NodeContext: Thursday, 31 July 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/business.start[0]/span/a

• HrefRaw: r7336
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7336
• CandidateSid: r7336
• AnchorText: Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[4]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: r7342
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7342
• CandidateSid: r7342
• AnchorText: Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt By 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt By 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[4]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: r7334
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7334
• CandidateSid: r7334
• AnchorText: Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[4]/subdebate.1[2]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a

• HrefRaw: r7333
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7333
• CandidateSid: r7333
• AnchorText: Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[4]/subdebate.1[2]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: s1459
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/s1459
• CandidateSid: s1459
• AnchorText: Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[4]/subdebate.1[3]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a

• HrefRaw: r7311
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7311
• CandidateSid: r7311
• AnchorText: Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[4]/subdebate.1[3]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: r7336
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7336
• CandidateSid: r7336
• AnchorText: Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[4]/subdebate.1[4]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 54
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/54
• AnchorText: Selection of Bills Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Selection Of Bills Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Selection Of Bills Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[6]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 35
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/35
• AnchorText: Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Rural And Regional Affairs And Transport References Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Rural And Regional Affairs And Transport References Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[9]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 34
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/34
• AnchorText: Environment and Communications References Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Environment And Communications References Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Environment And Communications References Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[9]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 74
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/74
• AnchorText: Public Works Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[9]/subdebate.1[2]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: s1463
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/s1463
• CandidateSid: s1463
• AnchorText: Sex Discrimination Amendment (Restoring Biological Definitions) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Sex Discrimination Amendment (Restoring Biological Definitions) Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Sex Discrimination Amendment (Restoring Biological Definitions) Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[11]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 47
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/47
• AnchorText: Appropriations, Staffing and Security Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[13]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[0]

• HrefRaw: 67
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/67
• AnchorText: Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[13]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[1]

• HrefRaw: 24159
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24159
• CandidateSid: 24159
• AnchorText: Implementation of the National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[13]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[2]

• HrefRaw: 24193
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24193
• CandidateSid: 24193
• AnchorText: Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy -- Select Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[13]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[3]

• HrefRaw: 24183
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24183
• CandidateSid: 24183
• AnchorText: Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[13]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[4]

• HrefRaw: 24192
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24192
• CandidateSid: 24192
• AnchorText: PFAS (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee , Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[13]/subdebate.1/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 243273
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/243273
• CandidateSid: 243273
• AnchorText: Senator Ruston interjecting --
• NodeContext: GeneralIInterjecting
• AncestorContext: McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:36, page 62
• ProceedingContext: Questions Without Notice / Aged Care / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:36, page 62
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[17]/subdebate.1[6]/answer[0]/talk.text/a

• HrefRaw: 243273
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/243273
• CandidateSid: 243273
• AnchorText: Senator Ruston interjecting --
• NodeContext: GeneralIInterjecting
• AncestorContext: McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:39, page 62
• ProceedingContext: Questions Without Notice / Aged Care / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:39, page 62
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[17]/subdebate.1[6]/answer[1]/talk.text/a

• HrefRaw: 243273
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/243273
• CandidateSid: 243273
• AnchorText: Senator Ruston interjecting --
• NodeContext: GeneralIInterjecting
• AncestorContext: McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:41, page 63
• ProceedingContext: Questions Without Notice / Aged Care / McAllister, Sen Jenny, New South Wales, ALP, 14:41, page 63
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[17]/subdebate.1[6]/answer[2]/talk.text/a

• HrefRaw: 19
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/19
• AnchorText: Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Rural And Regional Affairs And Transport Legislation Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Rural And Regional Affairs And Transport Legislation Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[24]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 27
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/27
• AnchorText: Education and Employment Legislation Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Education And Employment Legislation Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Education And Employment Legislation Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[24]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 48
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/48
• AnchorText: Privileges Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Privileges Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Privileges Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[24]/subdebate.1[2]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 55
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/55
• AnchorText: Senators' Interests Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Senators' Interests Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Senators' Interests Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[24]/subdebate.1[3]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 52
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/52
• AnchorText: Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Scrutiny Of Delegated Legislation Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Scrutiny Of Delegated Legislation Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[24]/subdebate.1[4]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 27
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/27
• AnchorText: Education and Employment Legislation Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Education And Employment Legislation Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Education And Employment Legislation Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[24]/subdebate.1[5]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: r7343
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7343
• CandidateSid: r7343
• AnchorText: Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Aged Care And Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Aged Care And Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[30]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a

• HrefRaw: r7344
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7344
• CandidateSid: r7344
• AnchorText: Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Aged Care And Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Aged Care And Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[30]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: r7338
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7338
• CandidateSid: r7338
• AnchorText: Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[30]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[0]

• HrefRaw: r7337
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7337
• CandidateSid: r7337
• AnchorText: Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[30]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[1]

• HrefRaw: r7340
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7340
• CandidateSid: r7340
• AnchorText: Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[30]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[2]

• HrefRaw: r7341
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/r7341
• CandidateSid: r7341
• AnchorText: Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• NodeContext: Bill
• AncestorContext: Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• ProceedingContext: Bills / Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[30]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 25
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/25
• AnchorText: Corporations and Financial Services Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[0]

• HrefRaw: 5
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/5
• AnchorText: Human Rights Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[1]

• HrefRaw: 11
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/11
• AnchorText: Law Enforcement Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[2]

• HrefRaw: 24170
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24170
• CandidateSid: 24170
• AnchorText: National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[3]

• HrefRaw: 24183
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24183
• CandidateSid: 24183
• AnchorText: Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[4]

• HrefRaw: 24157
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24157
• CandidateSid: 24157
• AnchorText: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[5]

• HrefRaw: 67
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/67
• AnchorText: Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[6]

• HrefRaw: 68
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/68
• AnchorText: Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[7]

• HrefRaw: 24159
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24159
• CandidateSid: 24159
• AnchorText: Implementation of the National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[8]

• HrefRaw: 70
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/70
• AnchorText: Migration Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[9]

• HrefRaw: 72
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/72
• AnchorText: National Capital and External Territories Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[10]

• HrefRaw: 79
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/79
• AnchorText: National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[11]

• HrefRaw: 24191
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24191
• CandidateSid: 24191
• AnchorText: Northern Australia Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[12]

• HrefRaw: 87
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/87
• AnchorText: Parliamentary Library Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[13]

• HrefRaw: 24105
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24105
• CandidateSid: 24105
• AnchorText: Trade and Investment Growth Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[14]

• HrefRaw: 76
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/76
• AnchorText: Treaties Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[15]

• HrefRaw: 66
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/66
• AnchorText: Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[16]

• HrefRaw: 73
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/73
• AnchorText: Public Accounts and Audit Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[17]

• HrefRaw: 74
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/74
• AnchorText: Public Works Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Corporations And Financial Services Joint Committee, Human Rights Joint Committee, Law Enforcement Joint Committee, National Anti-Corruption Commission Joint Committee, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee, Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Affairs Joint Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence And Trade Joint Committee, Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee, Migration Joint Committee, National Capital And External Territories Joint Committee, National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee, Northern Australia Joint Committee, Parliamentary Library Joint Committee, Trade And Investment Growth Joint Committee, Treaties Joint Committee, Broadcasting Of Parliamentary Proceedings Joint Committee, Public Accounts And Audit Joint Committee, Public Works Joint Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[0]/subdebate.text/a

• HrefRaw: 27
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/27
• AnchorText: Education and Employment Legislation Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Education And Employment Legislation Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Education And Employment Legislation Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[0]

• HrefRaw: 67
• HrefKind: unknown_signature
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/67
• AnchorText: Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Education And Employment Legislation Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Education And Employment Legislation Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/p[0]/a[1]

• HrefRaw: 24193
• HrefKind: probable_sid
• ReferenceKeyKind: href_attribute
• HrefResolved: https://www.aph.gov.au/24193
• CandidateSid: 24193
• AnchorText: Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy -- Select Committee
• NodeContext: Committee
• AncestorContext: Education And Employment Legislation Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• ProceedingContext: Committees / Education And Employment Legislation Committee, Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• Key: href
• Path: Root/hansard/chamber.xscript/debate[31]/subdebate.1[1]/subdebate.text/a

• Wednesday, 30 July 2025
• The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sue Lines ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

• The Clerk: I table documents pursuant to statute as listed on the Dynamic Red.
• Full details of the documents are recorded in the . Journals of the Senate

• The Clerk: Proposals to meet have been lodged as follows:
• Community Affairs References Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today
• from midday, for the committee's inquiry into aged care service delivery.
• Corporations and Financial Services -- Joint Statutory Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) on Thursday, 31 July 2025, from 9 am.
• Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation and References Committees -- private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 11.30 am.
• Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee -- private briefing today, from 9 am.
• Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 09:01 [1]
  • 09:01 (): If there is no objection, the meetings are authorised.

• Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 09:01 ( -- ) (): I move:
• That general business order of the day no. 5 (Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024) be considered today at the time for private senators' bills.
• Question agreed to.

• Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024 75 min [2]
  • Second Reading 68 min [10]
    • Consideration resumed of the motion:
    • That this bill be now read a second time.
    • Karen Grogan, South Australia, ALP, 09:02 14 min [21]
      • South Australia Deputy Government Whip in the Senate 09:02 ( -- ) (): I start by thinking about what was happening this morning when Senator Bragg woke up. He probably woke up in a warm, quiet environment, under a multiple-thread-count sheet, reached out his hand and grabbed --
      • Where's this going?
      • Hold your horses and you'll find out!
      • I'm starting to blush!
      • I think that says more about you than it does about me! He reaches out his hand to his fully charged, state-of-the-art iPhone. He thinks about what he's going to have for his breakfast. Maybe the fresh eggs in his fridge? Maybe that nice bacon he got from the deli?
      • He's a vegan.
      • If he's a vegan, he won't be eating that bacon, will he? Then he goes to the laundry and gets his crisply ironed, white shirt and starts to prepare for his day in a calm and ordered fashion, knowing that everything's in order and the only thing he has to worry about is why he put this bill, the Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024, forward in this house.
      • Down road, in a car park, Josie wakes up in her car. It's cold. It's damp. She's pretty stressed. She wriggles out of her sleeping bag and looks at the only thing that's left on the seat of the car for her to eat: some dry crackers. She shakes out her wrinkled clothes, looks across at her flat phone and wonders what on earth she is going to do today. She is stressed. Josie doesn't care who is going to build the housing of the future. Josie just wants it built so that she can find somewhere to live. She doesn't hate unions, she doesn't hate the CFMEU and she doesn't hate Cbus, but she does hate not being able to find a home.
      • What we're seeing here is just another attempt, in another year, to do nothing to address the housing crisis that we have in this country. While we on this side, the Labor government, are focused on building more homes and tackling the housing crisis, the opposition are coming into this, the second week of the 48th Parliament, with more and more of this ideological rubbish. Senator Bragg and his party are the same people who stood in this chamber, blocking every single housing solution that we brought in here. They blocked Labor's Help to Buy program, stopping 40,000 Australians from owning their own homes; they blocked our build-to-rent laws, stopping 80,000 renters; and they blocked the Housing Australia Future Fund, a $10 billion program that is directly supporting the delivery of tens of thousands of social and affordable homes, the kinds of homes that Josie needs so that she doesn't have to sleep in her car. So you've got to ask the question: is this bill really about housing, or is it about the opposition's ideological stand against unions, or is it about the opposition's pathological hatred of the CFMEU, or is it about the opposition's distaste for working people having a say in their own future --
      • It's all of the above.
      • or -- as rightly pointed out by my colleague Senator Sheldon -- is it all of the above?
      • Let's just be clear about part of the situation here. Superannuation funds, including Cbus, are actually strongly regulated. They are required to comply with strict governance standards, and they are required to act in the best financial interest of their members. APRA engages with superannuation funds on their governance arrangements and ensures that their boards meet the necessary standards. A longstanding feature of the superannuation system is equal representation, so you have equal numbers of employers and employees -- not one or the other but both, so both interests can be served. All superannuation fund trustee boards have to assure themselves that their directors meet the necessary standards. This is regulated; this is monitored. What's being put forward by those opposite is just an attack. It's not real. It's not helpful. What we are seeing when we look at the Housing Australia Future Fund is a fund that is administered by Housing Australia. It's an independent body, so the notion of capture between the superannuation funds and the unions is, as I say, just the ideological hatred that we see from the opposition. It clouds their vision, it clouds their view, it clouds their understanding of the situation, and it clouds their ability to actually do anything about it, so they continue to sit there and block any progress on housing in this country, and that's a disgrace -- an absolute disgrace.
      • We know that there are solutions. We know that there is a long-term fix. We've been working on it frantically for the last three years, looking at the situation in front of us and actually taking the time. Where do we not have enough housing? Why is that? What are the changes in the demographics? What are the changes in our population? What's the demand? Where's this going? How are we looking at this to find ourselves the right answer and the right balance between what housing we have now and what housing we need into the future? The pipeline of houses to build, the pipeline of houses to rent and the pipeline for people who are doing it tough and who require more support in our social housing -- we have been looking at these, and this is how we came up with Labor's plan for housing for the future, by knowing that we were in a crisis.
      • I have to ask the question: what exactly is it that the opposition did for 10 years when they were in government and when this crisis was brewing? All the indicators and signs were there that housing was turning into a crisis situation. Our rates of people who were homeless were increasing and our rates of people struggling to find rental accommodation were increasing. Now, we often hear the excuse that it was all COVID. No, it wasn't. It really wasn't. Ask any of the housing peak bodies or interest groups and look at their modelling, their structures and what they have looked at, and that's not true. Yes, it had an impact alongside a bunch of other things. But now we need action on the ground to actually look at where our housing situation is going, how much housing we need into the future and how swiftly we can get it on the ground. There are some fantastic solutions being put forward. Some of our states, particularly my own home state of South Australia, are doing an absolutely spectacular job of moving hurdles out of the way, finding innovative solutions and moving as quickly as possible to put in place the housing that we need into the future.
      • To touch on the pathological hatred of the CFMEU from across the chamber here, I fully support our construction workers. They deserve a strong union that can represent them and stand up for them, and that's exactly the path that we are on. Yes, an intervention was made because there was some untoward activity going on that could not be accepted. But the pathway is there for the future and for that union to stand up strong and support the workers with no bad behaviour and no untoward activities, but a union doing what unions do -- representing their members. That is what we wish to see into the future and that is what we will see into the future. Because, while we are on these government benches, we will be pushing to deal with this housing crisis and with anything associated with it that comes up. We need to have those opposite get out of the way and stop with this ideological rubbish. You might think it looks like a good headline, but, seriously, there are people like Josie who are living in their cars, and all you want to do is sit there and block action, block development and block a solution to the situation which is a crisis situation in this country and needs to be dealt with.
      • Housing can't be fixed overnight. We know that. You can't just snap your fingers and pop up some housing. But you had 10 years and you allowed the situation to crumble and to get worse and worse, and you did nothing. And now you have the cheek to sit there and block everything that we try and do. It is a disgrace, and you should be deeply ashamed of yourselves. The plan we have for the future is to get people into housing and to make renting more secure. A lot of the rental rules are dealt with by the states. We have seen state after state come to the party and improve the situation on the ground to make renting a property more secure, so you can live there knowing that is your home. I would, again, like to shout-out our South Australian state government for the changes they have made to rental laws which are making a real difference for people on the ground.
      • But we need to build more housing. We need to be able to take the money that we have and invest it in the Australians who need the support, who need more options. We cannot continue to have people like Josie sleeping in cars. We cannot continue to have people looking to purchase a house and feeling that they're never going to get there. We need these structures in place to enable people to have the security of a home, whether it's their own home or a rental. That's what we're all about. That is what we are doing here.
      • To increase supply is critical. If we build more housing, there are more options for people. People who can purchase, if they're given a hand, can get into those homes. I know from talking to people that many of them could actually service a mortgage, but they cannot afford to build up the size of a deposit they need for that home. Having that opportunity for a lower investment at the very beginning, with some support from the government, enables them to get into their home, where they can service that mortgage. They can get on their feet and own their own home into the future. And that's what we want. We want people to be able to own their own home. But, for those who rent, we want them to have a secure rental, to know that they are supported, to know that they are not going to be thrown out on the street with very little notice, to know that they can make that rental their own home.
      • Labor has a plan to address the housing crisis. We have started and we are working so hard to get that delivered. The constant attacks and the constant blocks by those opposite are deeply unhelpful. They should just wake up to the fact that people need assistance and need it now, and they should just get out of the way.
      • Interjection [4]
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Tony Sheldon, New South Wales, ALP
      • Continue [4]
        • Karen Grogan, South Australia, ALP
        • Karen Grogan, South Australia, ALP
        • Karen Grogan, South Australia, ALP
        • Karen Grogan, South Australia, ALP
    • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 09:16 9 min [10]
      • Queensland 09:16 () (): Senator Bragg has advanced the Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024, which modifies the charter of the Housing Australia Future Fund to prevent financing of projects that Cbus owns. Cbus is a superannuation fund with legal affiliation to the CFMEU. The CFMEU are currently under a federally appointed administrator, a move that was a long time coming. Queensland premier Crisafulli has called an inquiry into the CFMEU's systemic violence, intimidation, misogyny and bullying. This bill from Senator Bragg is common sense -- to prevent cash leaking through Cbus to the CFMEU until the CFMEU clean up their act and get back to representing Australian workers and to working constructively with industry to create secure, well-paid jobs at scale for all Australians.
      • Australia needs housing, and we need breadwinner jobs. We have a responsibility to ensure that infrastructure is built on time and on budget. One Nation does, though, propose a better alternative to Senator Bragg's bill. We would shut down the housing future fund and the federal department of housing. Housing is a state responsibility, a state power. Government has no role in building houses. Its presence in the market drives up prices and slows down production, displacing private builders and monopolising building products. We will wind the building code back to remove the woke nonsense and the net-zero nonsense which were recently introduced into the code, and suspend the GST on building materials. Together these will cut $50,000 off a new home's construction cost. Independently assessed, around $49,000 of that comes out of the modifications to the building code, which are rubbish. We will take the $11 billion in funds under management at the housing future fund and roll that into a people's bank, accessed through Australia Post, offering mortgages for first home buyers who are Australian citizens. It's been proven here in the past in Australia. It's been proven in North America. It's been proven in Japan and New Zealand.
      • Mortgages will be on five per cent interest with a five per cent deposit, fixed for up to 30 years. The five per cent deposit can come from the first home owner grant and then be topped up by using the applicant's own superannuation account, protected with a lien. Notice I said 'account', not 'fund'. This will not be a drawdown from super. Super is useful for retirement. Our policy simply replaces super funds investing in housing with the person's own super account investing in their own house. As the house grows in value, so too does the value of the lien held in the person's own superannuation account, protecting their retirement. Someone who has been working in the workforce for five years on average, and who is entitled to a first home owner's grant, may be able to move into their own home straightaway.
      • We must do more for the young Australians who this government, and other recent governments, have sold out. Young people who did everything society asked -- they studied hard, stayed out of trouble, got their degrees, got their high school qualifications -- now have a HECS debt, rent and a grocery bill they can't afford. And they are in despair, right across Australia.
      • The government's housing measures are complete rubbish. They are an insult to Australians. The government's own incoming government report stated clearly that their construction targets would not be met -- bloody hopeless. Canberra, as I've said many times, is the source of every major problem in this country, and one of the biggest problems we have in this country right now is a homelessness crisis -- an inhuman homelessness catastrophe.
      • In my state of Queensland, going from the north in Cairns, every major provincial city has a homelessness crisis, a housing crisis. In Cairns, Townsville, Mackay, Rockhampton, Gladstone, Bundaberg, Maryborough, the Sunshine Coast, the Gold Coast, Brisbane -- the capital city of what should be the wealthiest state in the world has got homeless people sleeping on the riverbanks, under bridges, in tents and in caravans -- Ipswich, Boonah, Toowoomba, in every major provincial city, there are homeless.
      • If you drive into Gympie, in a concrete car park, there are homeless people in tents. Parents come home at night -- working mothers and fathers -- wondering if their kids are still in the car and then sleeping in the car. Where do they go to the toilet? Where do they have showers? These are good people. And then the councils just put the bulldozer through the tents, put the bulldozer through the cars and that's it: gone.
      • Why is that happening in Queensland? It's because we've got so many people leaving Victoria to come up to Queensland. In particular, we have got catastrophic, inhuman immigration levels that this government and the previous government have perpetuated. Catastrophic immigration started with John Howard's government when he doubled immigration. Every prime minister since has been on the trend of increasing immigration.
      • We've got so many foreigners owning houses. Some of them are locked up as an investment, not being used. We've got 75,000 people here on residence visas illegally. One Nation says, 'Deport them immediately.' We've got students here in contravention of a student visa -- up to 100,000 of them. Get rid of them. Free up some houses. We've got accommodation capacity for 100,000 students; we've got about 600,000 overseas students in the country. That can't continue. One Nation says: start with the demand and deport people who are here illegally or in contravention of their visa -- deport them. Stop foreign ownership of housing, which will increase the supply. And, regarding the construction costs that I've mentioned, our policy goes beyond what I've mentioned briefly. We've also mentioned the finances. Our One Nation policy fixes demand, supply, construction and finance. Senator Grogan said that housing cannot be fixed overnight. It can be fixed close to overnight, just by doing the things One Nation has said: address demand, supply, construction and finance. We must do better. It takes several months to build a house; it takes several months to build an apartment complex. It doesn't take long, though, to deport people who are here illegally. It doesn't take long at all. That frees up supply and reduces the demand.
      • Canberra, as I said, is the cause of every major problem in this country, and it comes from both Liberal and Labor governments -- every major problem. The government's housing measures -- I repeat -- are rubbish. Their own incoming government report stated clearly that their construction targets would not be met, yet they perpetuate the nonsense. We must do better. One Nation are in support, and I thank Senator Bragg for this legislation.
    • Maria Kovacic, New South Wales, LP, 09:25 15 min [17]
      • New South Wales 09:25 () (): I'm going to start my speech a little bit differently than I had anticipated, because I was struck by something that Senator Grogan said. While Senator Bragg is a good friend of mine, I have to say, when I woke up this morning, I did not think at all about Senator Bragg or what he was doing -- no offence intended. I do note that he often does have a very crisp white shirt, though. I also note your comments, Senator Grogan, about Josie and when she woke up. Whilst I have never woken up in my car, I did, for many years, face housing insecurity with my children, and I do understand how difficult and how challenging that is and the need to have security of housing and that roof over your head.
      • I agree with your comment that Josie doesn't care who builds it, but I think we should care about who owns it. We have a problem with the fact that we have global institutional investors who will own these properties that Australians will live in. That's something we should have a think about, because, if we are building homes for Australians, it's our view that Australians should own those homes. Our priority should be that we have the option to own a home and that we should have the opportunity to own a home, not outsourcing that to some globalist entity who we then pay our incomes to in rent.
      • I also have a problem with the fact -- I've spoken about this before -- that women are allowed to access our super for emergency expenses of paying rent to someone that could be one of these global entities, but we can't access it to invest in our own housing for housing security for ourselves and our children. I would like someone to explain to me why one of those things is 'raiding the piggy bank of my own money' and the other isn't. I would think that raiding my piggy bank of super to have a roof over the heads of me and my children is a better thing when I own that property than me paying it in rent to a globalist entity like BlackRock or somebody else like that. I think that's something we need to think about. We're losing our perspective here. We need to get back to the basics and the fundamentals of the fact that we actually have a right to own our own housing, and somebody else shouldn't dictate to us what that should look like or suggest to us that we hate unions et cetera because we are opposed to the way they act.
      • Labor should be banning Cbus and the CFMEU from any involvement in the HAFF. That is a reality. I don't think there should be any question about that. That's not because people hate the unions or the CFMEU. They hate the misconduct, they hate the corruption and they hate the impact that it has on everyday people. Given the close connection and control between Cbus and the CFMEU, allowing Cbus to participate in the HAFF risks its integrity. Anybody who suggests otherwise is not looking at this plainly or clearly. Cbus has an obligation to spend its members' funds in the best interests of their members' retirement. However, super funds like Cbus make payments to unions masked as contracts or sponsorship agreements, and these types of payments are made by Cbus to the CFMEU.
      • What is also alarming is the destruction the CFMEU has caused in the construction sector, at a time when building more homes has never been more urgent. So when we're looking at barriers to getting things done -- I was actually listening to Senator Roberts. Many years ago, it did take months to build a house. Guess what? Now it takes closer to years to build a house. That is because of the red tape involved. That's because of the different hurdles at local and state levels that make it so hard for people to build homes. But there are also hurdles in construction that are brought in and are impacted by measures introduced by unions.
      • Numerous sources, including the Real Estate Institute of Queensland, have highlighted that the conditions of the CFMEU enterprise bargaining agreements are leading to an increase in cost of up to 30 per cent. When I spoke about this the other day, I just made it very simple in terms of what that means for what is now an entry-level dwelling in many cities across our country -- $800,000, of which 30 per cent is another $240,000. Good luck trying to save another $240,000 when you're already struggling to save your initial deposit. That's completely heartbreaking for young people who want to buy their own home. How do they even fathom that? Where do they begin? That is unacceptable.
      • Australian Financial Review We have heard allegations from state and federal detectives that the CFMEU New South Wales state secretary, Darren Greenfield, boasted to corrupt building firms that he could secure them lucrative contracts on major construction projects financed by Cbus because of his influence in the fund. That in itself should be disturbing. That in itself should be dealt with, but it hasn't been. The also reported that Greenfield previously told a building company owner that he would exert his influence over Cbus to ensure the fund instructed the lead contractor to use subcontractors favoured by the CFMEU -- not the best Australian small business or the best local business or the business that provides the best value but those favoured by the CFMEU. Have a think about that.
      • Despite purporting to take a hard line against the criminality in the CFMEU, Labor has refused to consider deregistering the union. Again, this isn't about hating the union, as the other side has said; this is about hating the conduct and hating the fact that this conduct continues unchecked. 'Let's put our head in the sand and pretend it's not happening.' Well, on this side of the chamber, we are not going to do that. Labor and Cbus have refused to recognise any issue with CFMEU representatives sitting on the board of a $94 billion fund, and Cbus has refused to cut its ties with the CFMEU despite the allegations and evidence of corrupt and intimidating behaviour. That's extraordinary. I don't think any other organisation in our country would be granted the same tacit consent to behave in that same way. Until Cbus has cut its ties with the CFMEU, it is an inappropriate party through which to undertake government business, and there can be no question about it -- none whatsoever.
      • So what is Senator Bragg wanting to do here? The Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024 would prohibit the HAFF from investing in housing assets or entities financed by Cbus Super to ensure taxpayer funds are left out of the criminal hands of the CFMEU. We shouldn't have any issue with that. We should all be in complete agreeance that that is the right way forward. By inserting an additional limitation in the HAFF's governing legislation, this bill will prohibit investments into housing related projects that Cbus has invested in or will invest in.
      • We've seen the impacts it's had on commercial construction and the construction of infrastructure in this country, the cost blowouts. So now, despite the fact that we have evidence of that criminal conduct, we're going to say: 'Yes, now, come into the residential construction sector. Come and help us build houses so that they cost more and take longer whilst we are in the midst of a housing crisis.' It's nothing short of madness. I can't think of anything but the fact that, as I said the other day, Labor has no interest in probity, no interest in transparency and no interest in stopping the criminal conduct of the CFMEU, because it is opening more doors for it to infiltrate more broadly across our construction sector.
      • As it stands, the HAFF can invest taxpayer funds into projects and entities financed by Cbus. Cbus Super and CFMEU, as Senator Bragg has often said, are conjoined twins. They are, it's clear. In the 2022-23 financial year, Cbus paid the CFMEU $1.25 million, including $233,000 paid to the CFMEU's Victorian branch for a sponsorship agreement. Let's repeat that: Cbus paid the CFMEU $1.25 million in 2022-23, and the Victorian branch was given $233,000 for a sponsorship agreement. Does that mean 'Cbus' gets written on the CFMEU T-shirts? I don't know what it's for. I would be keen to understand what that looked like. I hope they're really nice T-shirts.
      • And made in Australia, because I don't think they are!
      • Indeed, I would hope they are Australian made. It is no surprise, therefore, that APRA imposed additional licence conditions on Cbus to engage an independent expert to review whether their CFMEU board members are meeting their legal duties. Is this because APRA hates the unions? Is this because APRA hates the CFMEU? I don't think so. I don't think it's because they hate them. I think it's because APRA is very, very worried about the actions of the CFMEU, as they rightly should be and as everybody in this chamber should be. Just because you call someone out, just because you call out misconduct, doesn't mean you have a hatred for that organisation or for what their mission is. But we are right in this. If we can't call people out in this place for egregious misconduct and criminal activity, then when will we do it? How can we face the people who have elected us to represent them here if we remain silent on these things?
      • The Labor government and APRA should be pushing Cbus to cut ties with the CFMEU. This means kicking the three CFMEU directors off the board and stopping the endless flow of workers' money to the CFMEU. Let's not forget that the money that Cbus has is the money from its workers, the money that it is meant to be investing for the benefit of its workers. On the one hand, we are in agreement that the CFMEU should be in administration; we actually think it should be deregistered, but administration is fine. But I fail to see how an entity that has been put into administration could be receiving money from a super fund that belongs to members of that fund. I would like somebody to explain that to me and why it is okay, because I don't think it is.
      • Just a quick update, before I finish, on where the HAFF is at the moment. This is Labor's flagship housing policy, the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, and so far it has built 17 homes here in the ACT. I was listening to Senator Bragg in estimates when he was questioning Labor on how many dwellings they had built. I was just trying to remember who was in the room at the time, but it escapes me right now. The comment was that they had acquired and converted 340 houses from existing builds. It was an interaction between Senator Bragg and Senator Gallagher in the economics committee. I remember Senator Bragg's shock at the comment, 'acquired and converted'. It means they bought 340 houses that had already been built, and they effectively renovated them so that they were suitable for whatever type of housing they were seeking to put into the market. That means the government had actually entered the market and purchased 340 houses during a housing crisis, which meant young Australians or entry-level buyers could then not buy them. Was that lost on anybody? They've just created an additional barrier to entry for young Australians. It's quite extraordinary. Instead of building homes, Labor are building bureaucracies and barriers to entry. The Housing Australia Future Fund has been one of the greatest public policy failures in recent history. They promised to build 1.2 million homes by 2030, and -- this is not me saying it -- advice from Treasury has revealed that this promise will be broken.
      • Interjection / Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP
      • Continue / Maria Kovacic, New South Wales, LP
    • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP, 09:40 15 min [14]
      • Western Australia Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 09:40 ( -- ) (): I rise to speak in favour of Senator Bragg's Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024. This bill is a timely and necessary bill, but, more than that, this is a bill that is in the Australian people's national interest. It is a direct response to a failure of policy, a failure of governance and, more than that, as speaker after speaker has said, a failure of ethics by Mr Albanese and the Labor government. But, above all, why has Senator Bragg brought this bill forward? Because he is concerned, just like we all are in the Liberal Party and the National Party, with what is now a growing crisis in our housing system in Australia. This crisis is one that this Labor government has not only failed to fix -- and this is the bad news for Australians, and the statistics that we will all go through in our speeches do not lie -- but actually made worse.
      • All Senator Bragg's bill seeks to do is this: amend the governing legislation of the Housing Australia Future Fund to ensure that funds raised for public housing -- that is, housing for the Australian people -- do not flow into projects tied to entities controlled or influenced by the criminal, quite frankly, CFMEU. Specifically, what this bill will do is this: prohibit taxpayer money being funnelled into housing developments financed by -- the name sounds so lovely -- Cbus Super. The issue with Cbus Super, and what the Labor Party forgets to tell the Australian people, is that this superannuation fund is an entity inextricably linked to the most lawless union in this country. Even the government can't admit that it's not, because, with the help of the coalition, they put it into administration.
      • Let's be clear about Senator Bragg's bill. This is not a bill about a question of ideology. This is now about a question of integrity. Labor talked a big game in relation to the Housing Australia Future Fund. They continue to support a big game in relation to the Housing Australia Future Fund. But, instead, they've implemented it. The money is there. Let's actually look at what the real situation is for Australians who are battling to get into a home. 'Housing Australia Future Fund' is a great headline from the Labor government -- I'm not going to deny that. That is what they are so good at. I wouldn't give them 10 out of 10; I would give them 11 out of 10 for great headlines. But it's time, quite frankly, that we exposed the great headline and looked at the devastating reality of what this government is actually doing to Australians who are currently sleeping in cars and have no opportunity at all to get into the housing market -- and, worse than that, are being sold a pup by the Albanese government.
      • The Housing Australia Future Fund's central promise has failed, so let's look at what Labor said to the Australian people. This is what they said and continue to say whenever they stand up. The Australian people were told by Mr Albanese that his signature Housing Australia Future Fund would deliver, and I quote, 30,000 new homes. Mr Albanese also said: 'My government will be bold. My government will be ambitious. My government will be urgent.' Let's look at the actual statistics. This is not the coalition speaking; these other numbers that you get from departments at estimates. In other words, we ask the questions of those in charge of the Housing Australia Future Fund and we get the answers. The question we ask is -- 30,000 new homes; bold, ambitious and urgent -- how many has the fund actually built? Australians deserve to know this, and we will be telling this to Australians every single day between now, quite frankly, and the next election: as of July 2025, two years after the fund was announced -- this is a fact -- approximately 17 homes have been built.
      • Tell him he missed by 29,000.
      • He missed by only 29,900-and-something. That is an abject policy failure on the part of this government. They are failing the Australian people, whom we agree desperately need to get into homes. And yet all Mr Albanese did -- it's a great headline: urgency, integrity, ambitious and bold. But the reality confronting the Australian people, which, as I said, we're going to remind them of every single day between now and the next election, is that Mr Albanese is failing them.
      • Worse than that, though, is that Labor like to fudge the figures. What an insult to the Australian people! A few hundred homes have been acquired and converted. Hold on, the whole point was to build new homes. You actually add to additional housing stock in Australia. That's what a new home is. You build it and you add a home to the housing stock in Australia. Remember, the promise was 30,000. We're at around 17 after two years, but the problem with Labor is this: they still treat the Australian people as if they're mugs. This is how Labor fudge the figures: they increase them by saying or pretending that, when you acquire or convert an existing home, that's a success. Well, let me tell you what happens when you use Australian taxpayer money -- because that's what this is; it's Australian taxpayer money that was meant to be invested in new builds to add to housing stock -- to acquire or convert. Say I'm an Australian person and I'm out there hoping to get into that home right there. Do you know what the government does? It sweeps straight in, it purchases the home and it says, 'There's another Australian successfully in a home.' Well, quite frankly, enough is now enough, and we are going to expose the government for its continuous misleading of the Australian people.
      • So let us be clear: the Australian Labor Party under Mr Albanese, despite their promise to the Australian people and the billions they've invested in this -- and, shortly, we'll get to how much has actually been spent -- are not creating housing stock. You create housing stock; you create new homes -- that is how you get people who currently can't get into a home into a home. The Australian Labor Party and Mr Albanese are bidding against first home buyers. So I'm speaking to any young Australians out there who voted for the Australian Labor Party because they thought: 'I like their announcement. I like their plan. I love the title, Housing Australia Future Fund. I love their target' -- in fact, it wasn't even a target -- 'I love what they said, that they would deliver 30,000 new homes.' When you are at the next auction or the next open home, just remember that Mr Albanese is with you. The Australian Labor government are with you every step of the way, and the bad news for you is this: you thought you had enough to actually purchase this home. You thought you'd done the right thing, you'd saved up the deposit and you would be getting into that house. Well, guess what? Mr Albanese and the Australian Labor Party are swooping in and they are actually bidding directly against you. That is not policy; that is an absolute disgrace. That is performance art and nothing more. It is a reality. Australians cannot live in a press release or an aspiration, and they certainly can't live in housing stock that's not newly built when they're trying to actually get into the market, and all Mr Albanese is doing under this scheme is swoop in and outbid them.
      • Let's also have a look at the statistics, though. Mr Albanese stood up in front of the Australian people and said that the Housing Australia Future Fund would invest $10 billion for the future of housing in Australia. That was -- what? -- two years ago now. Again, this is not the coalition speaking. These are the figures that you get via the estimates process. The estimates process is when the opposition parties are able to question the department about what Labor said to the Australian people. Let's now talk about what they've actually done. There's $10 billion in investment for the future of Australian housing, but, after years of spin, at 31 March this year, $233 million had been spent. What's worse is that under the legislation there is a mandated annual commitment. For those who don't know what a mandated annual commitment is, it's this. People don't necessarily like being told they have to do something, but it's even worse when government has a mandated commitment to deliver on behalf of the Australian people, because government should be delivering on it. The legislation provides that half a billion dollars each year must actually be spent. But no, only $223 million has been spent from this fund. Let's be very clear. The rules are crystal clear. Half a billion dollars must be spent each financial year. We know they haven't met that, they can't meet it and, in fact, some might say they never had any intention of meeting it. They got the headline, they conned Australians and they're back in government.
      • We asked them where the additional $277 million had gone. It was meant to be spent before the 30 June deadline. I would have thought that, on behalf of the Australian people, who were promised something by Mr Albanese, they would want (a) the half a billion invested on their behalf or (b) forget the 17 homes; they'd want progress towards the 30,000. I think it's a fair question in behalf of the Australian people. The government were meant, by law, to invest half a billion dollars of our money to create additional homes, new builds, that young Australians and, in particular, women fleeing domestic violence could get into. They haven't, so what have they done with the rest of the money? The bad news for the Australian people is that Labor won't tell us. They actually won't tell us where your $277 million has gone. I mean, seriously! Anyone listening in the car should start dreaming up where you think the Albanese government could have spent the $277 million -- your money -- that they haven't spent on the housing that they told you that they would build, and they have not.
      • Unfortunately, the reality for the Australian people is that, yes, they voted the Albanese government back in, but they voted on the basis of promises that have now turned out to not be true. They voted on the basis of headlines which they believed. It is a fact that, under this government, they are not meeting their targets, they are not making the investments and Australians are still struggling to get into homes. The Housing Australia Future Fund is not a fund for delivering homes. It has been proven now by the evidence, two years after it was legislated, to be nothing more and nothing less. This is really sad. It's a familiar headline. I would have liked to have stood here and said that there is substance to it, but there's no substance to this at all.
      • I want to ask the Albanese government questions that they should be answering. How many young families have actually received a set of keys to a new build, not one of your conversions and not one of the ones where you've outbid an Australian trying to get into the market? How many single mums waiting in a motel have been told, under this fund, 'Your home is ready'? How many First Nations families on the 10-year waiting list have been told that, under this fund, 'Help is on the way, and you will be moving in'? What we have instead is the slow suffocation of the great Australian dream by a Labor government -- a government long on promises but short on delivery. As I said, this bill responds to a failure of policy, a failure of government and, quite frankly, a failure of ethics. Shame on those in the chamber who want to stand by the headline and not listen to the substance.
      • Interjection / Ross Cadell, New South Wales, NATS
      • Continue / Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP
    • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP, 09:55 15 min [15]
      • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 09:55 ( -- ) (): It really is a delight to follow my colleague Senator Cash, who spoke extraordinarily eloquently in relation to the Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024 -- which was put forward by my good friend Senator Andrew Bragg, from New South Wales -- and who made a number of points which she has repeatedly made in this place over a number of years.
      • I want to make some preliminary comments about the Housing Australia Future Fund. I have a deep belief that there is something concerning about the establishment of off-balance-sheet funds of this nature. It troubles me that, when these sorts of funds are set up, what happens is a government goes out and borrows $10 billion -- you've got to borrow that money upfront -- and then the idea is that, from the returns generated from those borrowed funds, it'll use the investment returns to invest into whatever the social purpose is. Certainly, housing is a valid social purpose; however, you are subject to some real risks.
      • One of the risks is that the investment returns on the fund don't cover the cost of the borrowing. The second risk is that you are forced by mandates, which are introduced as part of the establishment of the fund, to spend funds even if you don't necessarily have a concrete purpose or the best purpose to spend those funds within the mandated timeframe. That limits flexibility. The third risk is that it distorts the budget position with respect to government finances, because it's an off-balance-sheet fund. Those three issues with these sorts of off-balance-sheet funds concern me as a matter of principle, and I'll certainly keep raising my concerns with respect to these types of funds. I think we're finding, with the Housing Australia Future Fund, some of the weaknesses inherent in these sorts of off-balance-sheet funds.
      • I don't understand why the government can't simply appropriate funds during the course of a financial year and spend the funds through NGOs providing social housing or through state governments -- whatever the mechanism and however they want to spend it -- but do it year to year and give estimates through the forward estimates as to what the future funding commitments would be. From my perspective, cut out the middleman, cut out the off-balance-sheet fund, and just appropriate the funds and contribute them to whatever the purpose is. So I have that philosophical concern.
      • In terms of how the Housing Australia Future Fund has worked in practice, there are obviously some real concerns about whether or not the taxpayer is getting bang for their buck and also whether or not people who are facing the reality of a chronic shortage of affordable housing in this country at this point in time are being given the opportunity to address those circumstances. As Senator Cash said, it is deeply disturbing that two years after the announcement of the Housing Australia Future Fund, a $10 billion fund, the latest information we got out of estimates was that only 17 houses had been built -- absolutely extraordinary.
      • Another thing to observe in relation to the Housing Australia Future Fund is something we learnt through the Senate estimates process. I'm not sure why we have to find these things out through the Senate estimates process. Why can't the HAFF just tell us on a month-to-month basis? How many houses are you building and how many properties are you acquiring? Tell us. Be transparent. Give us a dashboard of what you're actually achieving. We shouldn't have to draw this out, like pulling teeth, through the Senate estimates process. Actually tell us how you're performing.
      • Anyway, my colleagues have used the Senate estimates process to great effect and found, in February of this year, that -- this is very curious -- the fund had acquired and converted 340 houses from existing builds. If my math is right, that is 20 times the number of houses that have actually been built. The Housing Australia Future Fund actually went onto the market and acquired houses in the market. Twenty times as many houses were acquired as were built. That wasn't my expectation when this legislation was debated in this place; I thought this was about facilitating the construction of new housing supply. Yet those are the figures. Two years after the announcement of the Housing Australia Future Fund, it's only built 17 houses, but it's gone out into the market and it's acquired and converted 340 houses. It's acquired 20 times more houses on the market than it has actually built. Presumably, when it acquired those houses on the market, it was doing so in competition with other Australians who were potentially looking at putting in an offer in relation to acquiring those houses. What chances did they have going up against the Housing Australia Future Fund? It's quite extraordinary.
      • Then there's this phrase that's used, 'acquired and converted'. I'm not sure what 'converted' means. I'd be much obliged if the minister or someone could contact my office and tell me what 'converted' means. I understand what 'renovated' means. Maybe the 340 houses that were acquired required renovations. I know a colleague sitting in this chamber has a construction background and gave a very good maiden speech last night -- I'm paying you a compliment, Senator Whitten! I'm not sure what this 'converted' means. Does it simply mean converted from private ownership to public ownership? Is that what 'converted' means? I don't know what 'converted' means.
      • But what really causes me concern is that the Housing Australia Future Fund acquired on market 20 times more houses that it actually built. When it acquired those houses, it did so in competition with everyday Australians out there trying to purchase a house. Some of them were probably trying to purchase their first house. They were potentially also in competition with social enterprises trying to purchase houses. It's quite troubling. What's happening is really quite troubling.
      • This should be seen in the context of the incoming government brief provided by Treasury that says, notwithstanding Labor's promise to build 1.2 million homes by 2030 -- that's what Labor promised the Australian people during the course of the last election campaign. It promised that it would build 1.2 million new homes by 2030. Then, immediately after the election -- which they won no doubt in part because of that promise and other matters -- Treasury sent an incoming brief to the newly re-elected Albanese Labor government and said: 'You've no chance. You're not going to be able to build 1.2 million homes by 2030. It's pie in the sky.'
      • So we've got 17 newly constructed houses two years after this $10 billion fund was established. We've got 340 houses acquired and converted, whatever that means -- 20 times as many houses acquired as were actually built. Then we've got Treasury advising the government that there's no chance that 1.2 million new homes will be built by 2030. So we've got the trifecta. We've got the trifecta there in terms of really disturbing information that was not apparent to this chamber -- it was not apparent to the Senate -- at the time this legislation was introduced into the Australian parliament. It is really concerning. Just think about that. I'm sorry to belabour this point; I really am. But it just shocks me. Two years -- a $10 billion fund in two years has constructed 17 houses. It's just extraordinary. And they've gone onto the market and acquired 340 houses -- that's 20 times as many -- in competition with everyday Australians. What chance does the everyday Australian have when they're up against this $10 billion government fund? No chance.
      • Then we have the issue which has been raised -- and I really congratulate Senator Bragg for the work he's doing in relation to this really important portfolio matter. I really do congratulate him. I think he's doing a wonderful job. As of 31 March, the government had only spent $223 million on the Housing Australia Future Fund. But the problem with this fund is that you mandate it. The legislation says you've got to spend at least $500 million by 30 June. So what happens if there isn't any sensible way in those last three months to pay or use or apply the balance of $277 million? What happened? Where'd the money go? What did you do? Did the fund have to go out into the market and try and gobble up as many homes as it could in terms of meeting that shortfall of $277 million? How many everyday Australians were then prejudiced against because they were trying to purchase maybe their first property in competition with this government behemoth, the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund? We've got no transparency in relation to that -- absolutely no transparency. The Australian people deserve transparency in relation to this $10 billion fund. It's their money, which was borrowed by the Australian government. That's $10 billion, and we've got no transparency with respect to what has happened to that remaining $277 million.
      • I note that the Auditor-General is now considering an official investigation into the Housing Australia Future Fund. It was only announced two years ago, and the independent Auditor-General is now considering an investigation into how this fund's operating. It's not a great start, is it? It's not a great start. You set up a $10 billion fund with borrowed money. You effectively indebted the Australian people for $10 billion. You've built 17 homes in the two years since it was announced. You've gone onto the market and actually acquired 20 times as many homes, 340, in competition with the Australian people. Basic economics says that that had to drive up the price of at least those homes. And then you've got this $277 million figure, which you were required to spend under the legislation -- no flexibility; you've got to spend that money -- and we don't know what it was spent on. Now, we've got the Auditor-General considering whether or not they should undertake an investigation in relation to the management of this fund. It's not a great start, is it? It's not a great start. I wonder where we'll be when we're reflecting on this fund this time next year. What will we have, 32 houses? And maybe they will have purchased 680? I wonder.
      • There is another issue with respect to housing -- and these are really important issues; there were a number of important policies which the coalition took to the election, which I hope that the government considers because there are some systemic issues in relation to the provision of housing. In the location of my office, in the region where my office is located in the south-west corridor of Queensland, which is a lovely place called Springfield, there is immense population growth. There are thousands of potential residential housing lots that have been caught up in bureaucratic red tape in Canberra for up to five years. For up to five years, they've been caught up in that bureaucratic red tape in Canberra. It's just madness. Those housing lots could start to be developed tomorrow if that red tape were navigated through.
      • (Time expired) One of the other policies which the coalition took to the last election was in relation to providing infrastructure funding to councils so that councils would get that additional support to enable them to actually invest in the infrastructure, the sewerage, the roadworks et cetera to open up new areas for housing development. I thought that was a terrific idea, and, talking to some of the councils, I know they thought it was a good idea as well.
    • Jonathon Duniam, Tasmania, LP, 10:10 [4]
      • Tasmania Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 10:10 ( -- ) (): I rise to speak on the Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024. I want to commend Senator Scarr on his enlightening contribution there. It was quite something to follow, because what Senator Scarr does is highlight the issues relating to housing in this country, which many will gloss over in this debate. We've had an election, and, yes, we have a returned government, but some in this place seem to think that that's a reset and that all of the issues that were there before the election have gone away and that we don't need to worry about the things we had to worry about before the election. But, if you go out there, as many of us do, and speak to our communities, you'd be reminded that the problems that were being experienced and faced by Australians before the election remain very much problems being faced and experienced by them now, despite there being a government returned to govern Australia.
      • That set of problems, those issues confronting Australians, of course include the matter of housing. I just think that we cannot lose sight of the fact that this problem being experienced by Australian households, young people and even older people seeking to enter into the housing market -- it has not in any way lessened the impediments to that. It certainly remains a problem. Senator Scarr talked through some of the suggestions we had by way of policy, including the removal of regulation and red tape, making it easier for investment to occur, assisting with the headworks costs that go into --
      • ( Senator Grogan ): Senator Duniam, the time for this debate has expired. You will be in continuation.
      • Interjection / Karen Grogan (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), South Australia, ALP
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Second Reading
      • Speaker Count: 6
      • Speakers: Karen Grogan (ALP); Malcolm Roberts (PHON); Maria Kovacic (LP); Michaelia Cash (LP); Paul Scarr (LP); Jonathon Duniam (LP)
      • Rational Thought Positives: Maria Kovacic (LP): source-backed reasoning: "That is unacceptable. Australian Financial Review We have heard allegations from state and federal detectives that the CFMEU New South Wales state secretary, Darren Greenfield, boasted to corrupt building firms that he could secure them lucrative contracts on major construction projects financed by Cbus because of his influence in the fund."; Maria Kovacic (LP): source-backed reasoning: "Indeed, I would hope they are Australian made. It is no surprise, therefore, that APRA imposed additional licence conditions on Cbus to engage an independent expert to review whether their CFMEU board members are meeting their legal duties."; Maria Kovacic (LP): data with source signal: "This is Labor's flagship housing policy, the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, and so far it has built 17 homes here in the ACT. I was listening to Senator Bragg in estimates when he was questioning Labor on how many dwellings they had built."; Michaelia Cash (LP): data with source signal: "Let's also have a look at the statistics, though. Mr Albanese stood up in front of the Australian people and said that the Housing Australia Future Fund would invest $10 billion for the future of housing in Australia."; Paul Scarr (LP): data with source signal: "In terms of how the Housing Australia Future Fund has worked in practice, there are obviously some real concerns about whether or not the taxpayer is getting bang for their buck and also whether or not people who are facing the reality of a chronic shortage of affordable housing in this country at this point in time are being given the opportunity to address those circumstances. As Senator Cash said, it is deeply disturbing that two years after the announcement of the Housing Australia Future Fund, a $10 billion fund, the latest information we got out of estimates was that only 17 houses had been built -- absolutely extraordinary."; Paul Scarr (LP): data with source signal: "Actually tell us how you're performing. Anyway, my colleagues have used the Senate estimates process to great effect and found, in February of this year, that -- this is very curious -- the fund had acquired and converted 340 houses from existing builds."; Paul Scarr (LP): data with source signal: "What's happening is really quite troubling. This should be seen in the context of the incoming government brief provided by Treasury that says, notwithstanding Labor's promise to build 1.2 million homes by 2030 -- that's what Labor promised the Australian people during the course of the last election campaign."
      • Speaker Response Positives: Malcolm Roberts (PHON): responded to Karen Grogan (ALP): "Senator Grogan said that housing cannot be fixed overnight."; Malcolm Roberts (PHON): explicit response signal: "One Nation are in support, and I thank Senator Bragg for this legislation."; Maria Kovacic (LP): responded to Karen Grogan (ALP): "New South Wales 09:25 () (): I'm going to start my speech a little bit differently than I had anticipated, because I was struck by something that Senator Grogan said."; Maria Kovacic (LP): responded to Karen Grogan (ALP): "I also note your comments, Senator Grogan, about Josie and when she woke up."; Maria Kovacic (LP): responded to Malcolm Roberts (PHON): "So when we're looking at barriers to getting things done -- I was actually listening to Senator Roberts."; Paul Scarr (LP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 09:55 ( -- ) (): It really is a delight to follow my colleague Senator Cash, who spoke extraordinarily eloquently in relation to the Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024 -- which was put forward by my good friend Senator Andrew Bragg, from New South Wales -- and who made a number of points which she has repeatedly made in this place over a number of years."; Paul Scarr (LP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "As Senator Cash said, it is deeply disturbing that two years after the announcement of the Housing Australia Future Fund, a $10 billion fund, the latest information we got out of estimates was that only 17 houses had been built -- absolutely extraordinary."; Jonathon Duniam (LP): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "I want to commend Senator Scarr on his enlightening contribution there."; Jonathon Duniam (LP): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "It was quite something to follow, because what Senator Scarr does is highlight the issues relating to housing in this country, which many will gloss over in this debate."; Jonathon Duniam (LP): responded to Karen Grogan (ALP): "Senator Scarr talked through some of the suggestions we had by way of policy, including the removal of regulation and red tape, making it easier for investment to occur, assisting with the headworks costs that go into -- ( Senator Grogan ): Senator Duniam, the time for this debate has expired."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt By 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025 116 min [3]
  • Second Reading / Karen Grogan (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), South Australia, ALP, 10:17 4 min [1]
    • ( Senator Grogan ) 10:17 (): The question is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Faruqi on sheet 3381 be agreed to.
  • In Committee 112 min [38]
    • Mehreen Faruqi, New South Wales, AG, 10:21 2 min [83]
      • New South Wales Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens 10:21 ( -- ) (): I move Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3368:
      • (1) Schedule 1, page 3 (line 1) to page 22 (line 30), omit the Schedule, substitute:
      • Schedule 1 -- Discharging student debt
      • Part 1 -- Amendments of the Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans Act 2014
      • Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans Act 2014
      • 1 Subsection 27(1)
      • Omit "on the day the instalment is paid", substitute "on the relevant day".
      • 2 After subsection 27(1)
      • Insert:
      • relevant day (1A) For the purposes of subsection (1), the is:
      • (a) unless paragraph (b) applies -- the day the instalment is paid; or
      • (b) if the instalment should have been paid on or before 1 June 2025 but was paid after 1 June 2025 as a result of an administrative error -- 1 June 2025.
      • 3 After section 27
      • Insert:
      • 27A Discharge of AASL debts incurred between 1 January and 1 June 2025
      • An AASL debt a person incurs in the period beginning on 1 January 2025 and ending on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged.
      • 4 After section 37
      • Insert:
      • 37A Discharge of accumulated AASL debt
      • An accumulated AASL debt a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged immediately after it is incurred.
      • Part 2 -- Amendments of the Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • 5 After section 137-19
      • Insert:
      • 137-19A Discharge of HELP debts incurred between 1 January and 1 June 2025
      • A *HELP debt a person incurs in the period beginning on 1 January 2025 and ending on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged.
      • 6 After section 140-35
      • Insert:
      • 140-36 Discharge of accumulated HELP debt
      • An *accumulated HELP debt a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged immediately after it is incurred.
      • Part 3 -- Amendments of the Social Security Act 1991
      • Social Security Act 1991
      • 7 After section 1061ZVDA
      • Insert:
      • 1061ZVDAA Discharge of SSL debts incurred between 1 January and 1 June 2025
      • An SSL debt a person incurs in the period beginning on 1 January 2025 and ending on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged.
      • 8 After section 1061ZVEE
      • Insert:
      • 1061ZVEEA Discharge of accumulated SSL debt
      • An accumulated SSL debt a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged immediately after it is incurred.
      • 9 At the end of Division 2 of Part 2B.3
      • Add:
      • 1061ZZEUA Discharge of accumulated FS debt
      • An accumulated FS debt a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged immediately after it is incurred.
      • Part 4 -- Amendments of the Student Assistance Act 1973
      • Student Assistance Act 1973
      • 10 After section 8B
      • Insert:
      • 8BA Discharge of ABSTUDY SSL debts incurred between 1 January and 1 June 2025
      • An ABSTUDY SSL debt a person incurs in the period beginning on 1 January 2025 and ending on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged.
      • 11 After section 9E
      • Insert:
      • 9EA Discharge of accumulated ABSTUDY SSL debt
      • An accumulated ABSTUDY SSL debt a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged immediately after it is incurred.
      • 12 After section 12ZG
      • Insert:
      • 12ZGA Discharge of accumulated FS debt
      • An accumulated FS debt a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged immediately after it is incurred.
      • Part 5 -- Amendments of the VET Student Loans Act 2016
      • VET Student Loans Act 2016
      • 13 Subsection 23BA(3)
      • Omit "on the day that the Secretary pays the loan amount", substitute "on the relevant day".
      • 14 After subsection 23BA(3)
      • Insert:
      • relevant day (3A) For the purposes of subsection (3), the is:
      • (a) unless paragraph (b) applies -- the day the Secretary pays the loan amount; or
      • (b) if subsection (3B) applies to the loan amount -- 1 June 2025.
      • (3B) This subsection applies to a loan amount if:
      • (a) the loan amount should have been paid on or before 1 June 2025 but was paid after 1 June 2025 as a result of an administrative error; or
      • (b) the loan amount:
      • (i) was paid during the period of 6 months beginning immediately after 1 June 2025; and
      • (ii) was used to pay tuition fees for a course, or a part of a course, for which the census day was on or before 1 June 2025.
      • 15 After section 23BA
      • Insert:
      • 23BAA Discharge of VETSL debts incurred between 1 January and 1 June 2025
      • A VETSL debt a person incurs in the period beginning on 1 January 2025 and ending on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged.
      • 16 After section 23CE
      • Insert:
      • 23CEA Discharge of accumulated VETSL debt
      • An accumulated VETSL debt a person incurs on 1 June 2025 is taken to be discharged immediately after it is incurred.
      • As someone who has long pushed for free and universal public education, I am proud to move this Greens amendment to wipe all student debt, because education should never be a debt sentence. A one-off 20 per cent -- but, really, effectively 7.9 per cent -- debt cut is unambitious and insufficient. It won't touch the sides of the crisis. All student debt should be wiped, and TAFE and uni should be free, as it was for the Prime Minister. It's clear that Labor felt the pressure from the Greens and have realised that wiping student debt is not only possible but very popular. So I call on you to do a better job of copying our policy and go the full 100 per cent.
      • Student debt is a crushing burden that punishes people simply for trying to learn and to build a better life. It entrenches inequality, disproportionately affects women and people from disadvantaged backgrounds, and really serves no social good. Wiping all student debt is not radical; it is necessary. It is a step towards justice and towards recognising that education is a public good and not a commodity to be bought and sold.
      • We're still in the cost-of-living crisis, yet millions continue to have thousands of dollars in student debt hanging over their head. Wiping student debt would free people to start families, buy homes and pursue further study without being shackled by decades of repayments. It would make a profound difference to so many. So I urge the Senate to back this amendment and deliver real relief for millions of people across this country.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 10:23 8 min [5]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:23 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Faruqi for her amendment. This bill provides significant relief to Australian students and workers with student debt. The bill cuts 20 per cent off all student debts. It wipes $16 billion from student debt for three million Australians, which will be backdated to 1 June 2025, before indexation was applied. It also delivers important structural reforms to repayments which will benefit generations to come. As the Minister for Education has said:
      • ... HECS blew the doors of universities open. When HECS was introduced, only about 5 per cent of the workforce had a uni degree. Now it's more than 26 per cent. Today almost one in two young people in their 20s and 30s have a university degree.
      • But it can be made better and fairer. Without HECS, fewer would get that choice. The number would be cut in half. This would effectively close the door behind those who already benefit from having a tertiary education. What the universities accord said was that we need more people going on to tertiary education, not fewer, and that's why the government will not support this amendment.
      • The question before the chair is that amendment (1) on sheet 3368 moved by Senator Faruqi be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
    • Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP, 10:31 10 min [69]
      • Victoria 10:31 () (): I move my amendment on sheet 3376:
      • (1) Page 33 (after line 22), at the end of the Bill, add:
      • Schedule 3 -- Capping student debt indexation at 3%
      • Part 1 -- Amendments of the Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans Act 2014
      • Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans Act 2014
      • 1 Section 5 (definition of WPI indexation factor )
      • Repeal the definition.
      • 2 Subsection 32(1)
      • Omit "the WPI indexation factor for 1 June in the financial year (see subsection (1B))", substitute "1.030".
      • 3 At the end of subsection 32(1)
      • Add:
      • Note: The AASL debt indexation factor is capped at 1.030. This means indexation cannot increase debt by more than 3%.
      • 4 Subsection 32(1B)
      • Repeal the subsection.
      • Part 2 -- Amendments of the Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • 5 Paragraph 140-10(1)(b)
      • Omit "the *WPI indexation factor for 1 June in the financial year (see subsection (1C))", substitute "1.030".
      • 6 At the end of subsection 140-10(1)
      • Add:
      • Note: The HELP debt indexation factor is capped at 1.030. This means indexation cannot increase debt by more than 3%.
      • 7 Subsection 140-10(1C)
      • Repeal the subsection.
      • 8 Subclause 1(1) of Schedule 1 (definition of WPI indexation factor )
      • Repeal the definition.
      • Part 3 -- Amendments of the Social Security Act 1991
      • 9 Subsection 1061ZZET(1)
      • Omit "the WPI indexation factor for the relevant year (see subsection (1B))", substitute "1.030".
      • 10 At the end of subsection 1061ZZET(1)
      • Add:
      • Note: The indexation factor is capped at 1.030. This means indexation cannot increase debt by more than 3%.
      • 11 Subsection 1061ZZET(1B)
      • Repeal the subsection.
      • 12 Subsection 1061ZZET(2)
      • Omit "or a WPI indexation factor".
      • 13 Subsection 1061ZZET(2)
      • Omit "or (1B)".
      • Part 4 -- Amendments of the Student Assistance Act 1973
      • Student Assistance Act 1973
      • 14 Subsection 12ZF(6)
      • Omit "the WPI indexation factor (see subsection (6A))", substitute "1.030".
      • 15 At the end of subsection 12ZF(6)
      • Add:
      • Note: The indexation factor is capped at 1.030. This means indexation cannot increase debt by more than 3%.
      • 16 Subsection 12ZF(6A)
      • Repeal the subsection.
      • 17 Subsection 12ZF(7)
      • Omit "or a WPI indexation factor".
      • 18 Subsection 12ZF(7)
      • Omit "or (6A)".
      • Part 5 -- Application provisions
      • 19 Application of amendments
      • The amendments made by this Schedule apply in relation to working out an amount of debt as at 1 June 2025 and as at a later time.
      • This is a very important amendment to this bill. It has the effect of capping HELP indexation at three per cent. This would mean that HELP indexation would change to the lower CPI or three per cent, ensuring that everyone with a student debt, including future students signing up for a HELP loan, would not be lumbered with the risk of escalating high indexation such as we have seen under this Labor government. Since Labor was elected, even after changes to the way HELP indexation is calculated, student debt has increased by an alarming 14.3 per cent. This is in stark contrast to the average indexation rate under the former coalition government of just 1.7 per cent.
      • This is a proposal backed by Australia's pre-eminent higher education expert Professor Andrew Norton of Monash University. In our Senate inquiry last year into the bill which changed HECS indexation to the lower of CPI or the wage price index, he made it very clear that a much more certain way to proceed is to set a flat maximum indexation rate. He said that this has the benefits of simplicity and reassurance. I say to this chamber: why should anyone with a student debt face the risk of a 7.1 per cent increase in their student debt, as happened in 2023? That was simply outrageous. Why did that happen? That happened because the Albanese government failed to control inflation. Inflation was higher for longer because inflation was home grown, and because HELP indexation was directly linked just to CPI, when inflation was high, HELP indexation was high. Australian students, young Australians and anyone with a HELP debt paid a very high price.
      • Then the government had to scramble because, with very high indexation rates -- 3.9 per cent in 2022, 7.1 per cent in 2023 and 4.7 per cent in 2024 -- anyone with a student debt was facing an increase over those three years of nearly 16 per cent. So the government scrambled, and it changed the indexation methodology to be the lower of wages or CPI. Of course that meant that there was an adjustment in the indexation, and indexation rates did come down. That was at a cost of $3 billion. So there was some saving. But of course that only happened because wages were running at less than inflation -- real wages were going backwards -- and that has happened pretty rarely over the last 30 years. So it was a short-term fix, but it did not address the core problem.
      • We need to build confidence in the HELP scheme. We need to make sure that, if anyone is going to take out a HELP debt, they have the confidence to do so and have their potential risk capped within the upper band of the RBA's inflation band, which is, of course, between two and three per cent.
      • I'm bringing this amendment forward. It hasn't received the support of the coalition as a whole, but many of my colleagues have spoken to me about the positive merits of this amendment. It was something that I took forward before the last election and I think it's a very important policy that we need to embrace as a whole. But I'm bringing this forward now because there is no time to waste. The coalition needs to present a credible policy alternative when bills come before the parliament. There's no point doing this in 12 months time. This is basically saying to the Senate 'here is a credible policy alternative.' Frankly, I've even had a couple of conversations -- and I won't disclose those conversations -- with people associated with the Labor Party, and I think they see that this has some real merit as well. So I am asking for the support of the Senate for this amendment.
      • I do note with disappointment Senator Faruqi's comments about not supporting this amendment, and I say: what hypocrisy from the Greens! Senator Faruqi -- through the chair: to be fair, we have been on the same page on the huge escalation in student debt, and, in some respects, particularly on higher education, we've worked quite closely together where we've got mutual interests. Now, I get the politics, Senator Faruqi, but what I don't understand is why you would oppose this amendment, because this delivers greater certainty and greater assurance for anyone signing up to a HELP loan. So I'm disappointed. I think there's been a dirty deal done between you and Labor, because that's what happens in this chamber. We constantly see deals behind closed doors --
      • Where's the dirty dealing on the opposition's side?
      • Senator Hanson-Young, at least I've got the courage to stand up for my convictions. So why doesn't the cult of the Greens --
      • I stand up for my convictions every day. Where were you the other day on net zero?
      • Order! Senator Henderson, please resume your seat. Senator Hanson-Young, please cease interjecting. Senator Henderson, please direct your comments through the chair.
      • So I just say to the Greens I'm very disappointed that the Greens would not support this amendment, because this does provide more certainty. It does provide greater assurance. It does build confidence in the HELP scheme when young Australians know that they can sign up and that they do not face the risk of escalating student debt year in and year out.
      • I am really concerned. I spoke last night on the second reading about my concerns about the student debt discount bill, because there are big winners and losers here. I won't repeat what I said last night in my speech on the second reading, other than to say I am going to support the bill, but I would like to see the bill improved. I think this does improve the bill. I think perhaps members of the government would privately consider that as well. I am asking the crossbench to support this amendment. This respects the fact that young Australians have had it really tough over the last three years. The cost-of-living crisis has hit young Australians really hard. Australians are struggling to put food on the table. Australians are struggling to pay the rent. And then they are faced with these massive increases in student debt, which, of course, the government has now alleviated through the student debt discount. But that is not the way to run a loan scheme. What's going to happen? Is the government going to go to the next election with another student discount costing Australians and the 24 million people who do not benefit from this another $16 billion dollars? That is not the way to run a loan scheme.
      • A much more responsible way to run it is to cap indexation and then for the government of the day to take its responsibility to manage inflation seriously. It imposes greater discipline on any government to say, 'We take our responsibility to manage inflation very seriously, because, if we don't, we will pay the price.' At the moment, what's happening under the HELP scheme with indexation uncapped is that Australian students and debtors are paying the price and wearing the loan scheme.
      • To the Greens: please reconsider your position. To the crossbench: please support this amendment. This is commonsense policy. This is sensible policy. This is acting in the best interests of young Australians seeking to enter tertiary education. This is acting in the best interests of all Australians. That's why I'm asking that this amendment be supported.
      • Interjection [3]
        • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG
        • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG
        • Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
      • Continue [2]
        • Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP
        • Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 10:41 3 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:41 ( -- ) (): The government will not be supporting Senator Henderson's amendment -- and, by Senator Henderson's own admission, the opposition is clearly not supporting her amendment either. We have already acted to fix indexation. In case Senator Henderson wasn't paying attention, last year we capped indexation at the lower of CPI or the wage price index. That change applied retrospectively from 1 June 2023 and ensures that HELP debts don't grow faster than wages in the future. This was a recommendation of the universities accord, and the government acted on it. That should be no news to Senator Henderson. She was the shadow minister for education when that bill was introduced. At the time, she didn't seek to amend it to limit indexation.
      • Senator Henderson claims that she cares about rising student debt, but perhaps Senator Henderson has forgotten the changes that she as the then shadow minister put forward at the last election to shift the cost of Commonwealth prac payments back into student debts. They released their costings on the Thursday before the election, with the hope that no-one would notice, relentlessly seeking to shift costs to students before prac payments even started. Instead of the government providing $331 per week to teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students to offer a bit of support while they're undertaking their prac placements, the coalition wanted to make those students add that cost to their own HECS debt. According to the coalition's costing, that would look like adding $556 million to student debts over four years, driving up their HECS debt, increasing repayment times and reinforcing a fact that young people already knew: the coalition has no interest in supporting students and young Australians whatsoever.
    • Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP, 10:44 5 min [7]
      • Victoria 10:44 () (): Minister, I'm very aware of the change in indexation, because I just spoke about it. Of course, late last year, in a mad scramble, the government did change indexation. It was pegged to CPI, and it's now the lower of the wage price index and the consumer price index. I don't appreciate being belittled, when it's clear that I understood the change in indexation. Of course, the only reason there was a benefit of some $3 billion delivered to Australian students was that wages were going backwards. That's the only circumstance where wages are lower than CPI. That says a lot about the Albanese government's mismanagement of the economy over the last term of this parliament.
      • So, Minister, I first want to ask you the question: would you confirm -- and, so as not to mislead the Senate, make it very clear -- that, currently, HECS indexation is uncapped, isn't it? That's the case, Minister. HECS indexation is uncapped; there is no fixed maximum ceiling. So, under your government's scheme, we could see a situation where there are high wages, a high wage price index and a high consumer price index, and Australian students and debtors will pay the price.
      • And let's not forget the changes to the repayment schedule. It's estimated that, for someone earning $70,000 and paying the minimum amount, that repayment will take in excess of 50 years. You're saddling so many young Australians -- primarily women, because women are more likely to work part time than men -- with the risk of having this debt around their neck for 50 years, the best part of a lifetime.
      • This is why -- and, of course, this is something that the shadow minister has also very ably argued -- the student debt discount is a short-term sugar hit. So I ask you, Minister, to be transparent in the Senate and please confirm that the HECS indexation methodology that currently applies is uncapped, as that's why this amendment that I'm bringing forward is so important.
      • Secondly, you've raised the prac payments. The university sector, on the whole, has rejected the prac payments, because the government was asking the university sector to basically operate as Services Australia and delve into the private information of students in circumstances where universities don't have that capacity. Universities are not Centrelink.
      • But to your point about prac payments: you say you care about young Australians, because the intention of the change in the policy that was announced at the last election -- and, yes, I agree, it was announced very late in the piece, and I've raised concerns about that -- was to ensure that students right across the board could benefit from prac payments, not just those doing nursing, midwifery, social work and teaching. So I would ask you why, Minister, if you're going to celebrate this prac payment scheme, the government has failed to include other students in the prac payment scheme. That was our proposal. We wanted to broaden the prac payment scheme so that every student would benefit, because -- believe it or not -- there are veterinary students out there doing the most incredible job in remote and regional Australia, where there are acute shortages, and they get nothing from this government. They are trying to make ends meet too. This is just an indication that the government doesn't care about students who do veterinary science. And what about those who study allied health? Why don't they matter, Minister?
      • I would say to you that every young Australian going to university or to TAFE -- every young Australian embarking on tertiary studies -- matters, so what the government has done with its prac payment scheme is to pick winners and losers. Medical students have also raised concerns. So I would ask you why those students were excluded from the prac payment scheme as well.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 10:49 10 min [9]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:49 ( -- ) (): Well, Senator Henderson appears to be debating last year's bill, not the bill that is in front of the chamber today. Last year, before the election, we fixed how HECS indexation was done. We made it the lower of the CPI and the wage price index. I know Senator Henderson has a different proposal now, which is not supported by her own party. This is a proposal that Senator Henderson might have taken to her party and to the chamber last year when we passed our legislation to fix HECS indexation. She is debating a bill from the previous parliament, not the bill that we have in front of us today. We have fixed HECS indexation, in terms of making sure that it's the lower of the CPI and the WPI.
      • In addition, Senator Henderson makes claims about inflation and how inflation is running. If her three per cent measure were applied today, of course, it would be higher than inflation. When we took office, inflation had a six in front of it. Because of the measures that we've put in place over a sustained period of time, inflation now has a two in front of it. As I understand, Senator Henderson is trying to prosecute both legislation and economic debates from the previous parliament. She's doing that in an apparently friendless way, in terms of not having the support of her own party for the measures that she is putting forward.
      • We are really proud that we have a bill in front of us today that does exactly what we said we would do before the election. Before the election, we said we would wipe $16 billion off the debt of three million Australians, and that is exactly what this bill does today. For a person with an average HECS debt of around $27,000 this bill will save them $512 thousand. It will wipe 20 per cent off their HECS debt. We said that we were going to do that, we took that to the election, the Australian people voted for it, and that is the legislation that we have in front of us today. This is legislation that reduces people's student loan debt by 20 per cent, an average saving of $512 thousand.
      • In addition to that, we are making the way in which HECS debt is repaid better and fairer. We are raising the minimum repayment threshold from around $54,000 to around $67,000. The purpose of that is to allow students to earn a reasonable wage before they have to start repaying their student debt. We want people's higher education to start paying off for them before they have to start paying off their HECS debt. At the same time, we are also reforming the marginal repayment system, meaning that people will repay their HECS debt calculated on only the proportion of income that is above that threshold -- the $67,000 threshold -- rather than their total annual income. These are the measures that are actually in the bill that is before us today.
      • This is a bill that does what it says on the label. It cuts student debt by 20 per cent. It provides an average saving of $512 thousand per year for the average HECS debt of around $27,000. It makes the repayments fairer by raising the minimum repayment threshold to $67,000. And it also reforms and introduces a marginal repayment system, meaning that repayments are calculated on the proportion of income above the threshold rather than someone's total annual income. Under that measure, the reform in relation to the marginal repayment system, someone earning $70,000 a year will have their compulsory repayments reduced by $1,300 a year -- from currently $1,750 down to $450. So this is really significant reform. In addition to doing what we said we were going to do and wiping 20 per cent off student debt, we are also making the way in which people's loans are repaid better and fairer.
      • We are doing that because we know that student debts are a significant burden on young people in Australia today. That's why we took this measure to the election, alongside a whole series of measures to provide cost-of-living relief to Australians. We know that people in their 20s, who are starting out in life, are just setting themselves up in life. It might be a time in life when they're thinking about buying a house. It might be a time in life when they're thinking about starting a family. It's a time in life when they're embarking on their careers. We know that too many young Australians are weighed down by the debt that they have, and that is why we took this measure, a 20 per cent reduction in student debt, to the election.
      • During the election campaign, when asked, 'What is the first thing that this parliament will do and will consider?' the Prime Minister said that HECS debt relief would be our first piece of legislation. And here we are today, in the Senate, ready to pass this bill, a bill that will cut student debt by 20 per cent, a bill that will give a person with an average HECS debt a $512 thousand saving, a bill that will also improve the way in which repayments are made by making sure that people earn more before they have to start paying their debt back. The new minimum repayment threshold is $67,000 a year. At the same time, people's repayments will be calculated just on the income that they make above the new threshold of $67,000. So we are doing exactly what we said we were going to do. We said we would wipe 20 per cent off student debt, we said it would be the first thing that we would do, and that is exactly what we have in front of us in the chamber today.
      • And, of course, the HECS system is a really proud Labor legacy that has helped so many Australians go to university. We want a sustainable HECS system that allows us to continue to support more students to go to university and have the benefits of higher education. One of the improvements that we are making with this bill is to reform the marginal repayment system, meaning that the way in which your repayments will be calculated will be on the proportion of income above the new repayment threshold. That is a reform that has been welcomed by the architect of HECS, Professor Bruce Chapman, who said it was the most significant reform since HECS was introduced.
      • We know that we need more Australians to get the benefits of tertiary education. When HECS was introduced, a very small proportion of Australians actually had a tertiary education. Our government wants more people to have the benefits of tertiary education and the opportunities that it brings. These reforms to HECS will help students. These reforms will help young Australians with the cost of living and help them repay their HECS debts as well. And, of course, we are committed to more Australians being able to get the benefits of university by having a sustainable HECS system. The HECS system was introduced by a Labor government and is being improved by a Labor government. We are doing exactly what we said we would do before the election, and that is cutting $16 billion of debt on top of the $3 billion that we already cut in the previous term.
    • Jonathon Duniam, Tasmania, LP, 10:59 4 min [9]
      • Tasmania Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 10:59 ( -- ) (): I wanted to take the opportunity to speak to this amendment. Obviously, the opposition have made it clear that we won't be supporting the amendment, not because the amendment --
      • Oh, Senator Duniam!
      • I know -- to disappoint Senator Henderson! It's not because it's a bad amendment but because we felt that, in terms of this Labor bill which is before us, there would be a better time to deal with the good proposals by Senator Henderson -- something that I think we would certainly like to advance as part of a policy down the track.
      • To that end, we have indicated, as I said in my second reading contribution, that we will not stand in the way of this legislation. Despite the claims the minister makes, we remain concerned about elements of it, especially around the suggestion that the world is all peachy now and that, because of this legislation, the world for young people -- students who might be encumbered with debt -- is much better. We hear claims that they've fixed inflation as if it's a permanent and ongoing arrangement. Things might be better now, but there are things beyond this government's control which have an impact on these arrangements -- to the points made by Senator Henderson.
      • So, while we won't be supporting the amendment before us today, we do say that there are elements of it which do carry merit. I commend Senator Henderson for bringing forward amendments for discussion. The good thing about the coalition is that I work with colleagues who have minds of their own. They think. It may not be a bunch of automatons doing what they're told by their leader. We can do our own thing. It's great to have robust debate. It's great to have different opinions expressed, and that's something I will always welcome from my colleagues. Yes, it might make a bit more work from time to time, but I'm up for that. That's why we're here -- to actually have a free flow of ideas and a frank exchange of views. I accept the points that Senator Henderson has made, but I don't accept some commentary provided by the minister around what this does in terms of fixing everyone's problems once and for all and the world being a better place because of this. It goes some way and costs a lot. It doesn't change things.
      • We've had two days of churlish political pointscoring in question time in relation to this stuff. I would say to Minister Walsh: take a page out of Minister Clare's book when it comes to being bipartisan. That's a minister who's shown us how government can work with opposition. He's been forward leaning, he's been proactive and he's been professional. He hasn't sought to score political points on this or other matters, and I welcome that. I think that's what Australians want from leaders, which is why I find it baffling that you're here progressing this legislation, we've got very serious issues on the cards when it comes to this portfolio, especially in the early learning space, and we spend time in question time scoring political points. I just don't understand how that is what a leader should do in this debate when young Australians, including those who frequent the galleries upstairs, look down on us and see what we're doing, be it in question time or at other points in the debate. I welcome Minister Clare's bipartisanship on a range of education measures. As stated, we're not going to stand in the way of government delivering some relief to young Australians, but we would certainly welcome an increased approach to bipartisanship on matters that affect all Australians, including young Australians who are embarking upon higher education and who bear costs as a result.
      • As stated, we won't be supporting the amendment, but I thank Senator Henderson for her efforts in this. I look forward to working with her in the future on anything we may do.
      • Interjection / Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP
      • Continue / Jonathon Duniam, Tasmania, LP
    • Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP, 11:03 5 min [7]
      • Victoria 11:03 () (): Firstly, I want to thank Senator Duniam for his very kind words. I've worked very closely with Senator Duniam and many other colleagues in relation to this and many other matters in the education portfolio. This is one of the great things about being a member of the Liberal Party. We are able to bring ideas forward from the backbench. While I'm not thrilled about being on the backbench, I have to confess, it certainly does allow all members on our side to collaboratively work with shadow ministers and to bring forward ideas in a way that's collegiate and constructive. I just want to thank all of my colleagues with whom I have worked very constructively on this amendment. I particularly want to thank Senator Duniam for his kind words and for the constructive and very close way that we have worked together.
      • I also indicate that I agree with Senator Duniam. I think the minister is playing unnecessary politics, and the ribbing I received yesterday during question time about being on the backbench is pretty shabby, frankly. If a member of the Labor Party wants to bring forward an amendment contrary to Labor Party policy, guess what happens in the Labor party? That member gets expelled. So, unlike the command and control in the Labor Party, where any alternative voices or ideas are shut down -- we have, of course, seen one member of your party move to the crossbench as a result of her having different ideas -- one of the great traditions of our party is the ability to express our views and our conscience as a member of the backbench. So I say to the minister: perhaps it is about time -- I've seen this in the childcare space -- you stopped playing so much politics and started acting a little more graciously. I would ask you to do so in relation to my right, and the way that my party backs my ability, to bring forward an amendment in the national interest, in particular in the best interests of young Australians and future Australians who are thinking about going to university or vocational education.
      • One of the really big flaws of the student debt discount bill is that it basically cuts off from 1 June. So any student looking to enrol in semester 2 -- of course, semester 2 is just about to start -- is completely left behind. There's no discount for them. Of course, there's also no discount for future students. Also, you may not be aware, Minister, but the indexation rate which was announced on 1 April and applies from 1 June this year actually doesn't have a two in front of it, as you tried to suggest -- and to mislead the Senate on, in my view. It is actually 3.2 per cent. The current HELP indexation rate applying this year is 3.2 per cent. This proposal to cap indexation at three per cent would deliver a moderate saving to each individual student and debtor, so that would deliver immediate cost-of-living relief. It's only fairly modest, as I say, but, over time, when that compounds year after year, that starts to make a really big difference.
      • I think what's more important about this cap is that it gives absolute certainty and builds confidence in the HELP scheme. Minister, I would ask you to correct the record and ask you to confirm that the HELP indexation rate that applies this year does not have a two in front of it but is in fact 3.2 per cent.
      • The question is -- were you seeking the call, Minister, or do I put the question?
      • Sorry, Senator Pocock is on his feet.
      • Interjection [3]
        • Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
        • Senator Walsh interjecting --
        • Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
    • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 11:08 2 min [2]
      • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 11:08 ( -- ) (): I want to thank Senator Henderson for her work on this amendment. It makes a lot of sense to me to have a ceiling on indexation, given what HECS is for. HECS is there to ensure that university education can be provided to more Australians. I also recognise that, for most people who go through university, that increases their earning potential. We want people to be able to go to university and have a HECS debt but then be able to repay that debt. Clearly, some certainty around the maximum level of indexation would be really helpful in this scheme, given what we've seen happen over the last few years.
      • I also want to acknowledge the government's work to reform indexation. We must acknowledge that they did good work in the last term around this, changing the way that it is set and calculated. But it's only half the job done. We are still charging Australians with a HECS debt indexation -- effectively interest -- on money they have already repaid to the ATO. I find it the most outrageous thing -- that we have a system where you can repay for 11 months to the ATO and then get charged indexation on that amount. I got the PBO to look at this, and their calculation is that, over the next four years, Australians with HECS debts will pay to the ATO $700 million of indexation on amounts that they've already repaid to the ATO. Can you imagine the outrage if banks were charging interest on mortgage repayments that had already been paid back to those banks? We obviously don't allow it. Why do we allow this system, which penalises people with HECS debts? Minister, I'm interested to hear from you. Why aren't we changing the date of indexation? I acknowledge the work you've done, but there's still more to do when it comes to indexation.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:10 5 min [6]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:10 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Pocock. I was in the process of jumping before, Chair --
      • Sorry.
      • but I understand that I didn't quite get the call. To respond to Senator Henderson, HECS indexation going forward will, of course, reflect the low inflation that we have and a CPI with a two in front of it. I can confirm that. And I appreciate the feedback on question time; it's always good to get feedback from the opposition on question time. But this is a bill that is about doing what we said we were going to do and cutting student debt.
      • I'll go to some of Senator Pocock's comments now. Senator Pocock, I think you acknowledged in your statement that this is a significant piece of reform and that you'd also like to see it go further. Again, the bill that we have in front of us today reduces student debts that existed on 1 June 2025 by 20 per cent. It also raises the minimum repayment threshold to allow students to start earning a reasonable wage before they have to start repaying their student debt, which is a really important reform. And, of course, we are introducing a marginal repayment system, which means that repayments are calculated on the proportion of income above the threshold of $67,000. These are really important reforms. We said we were going to reduce student debt by 20 per cent -- $16 billion for three million Australians. We took it to the election, Australians supported it, and we look forward to having the support of the parliament and the chamber.
      • In relation to the measure that you're talking about, in terms of further changes to indexation and the dates on which indexation occurs, there were a number of recommendations which were made under the universities accord -- a large piece of reform, a big agenda, the biggest review done on the higher education system in 15 years. A range of recommendations were made in that accord. The bill that we have in front of us today, of course, goes to implementing some of the recommendations of the universities accord. We have implemented, either fully or in part, 31 of the 47 recommendations. Further recommendations, like the one that you have spoken about, are being worked through by the new Australian Tertiary Education Commission, which commenced in an interim capacity on 1 July. That's being led by Professor Mary O'Kane AC, the interim chief commissioner. We look forward to coming back to the parliament with more legislation about that. We're really proud of the work that the universities accord did and of the program of work that it gave us. We are continuing to work through those recommendations. What we have in front of us today is a bill which does what it says it is going to do, what it says on the label, which is reduce student debt by 20 per cent.
      • Continue [2]
        • Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
        • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP
    • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 11:15 2 min [3]
      • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 11:15 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Minister. I accept that a lot of stuff has been put into future reviews and future pieces of work. I still don't understand how there's any justification to charge indexation on amounts that have already been repaid to the ATO.
      • My other big question is about the government's approach to student debt and why there hasn't been a reform of the Job-ready Graduates Package. When you were in opposition, before I was in the Senate, I heard so much from the Labor Party about how bad Job-ready Graduates was and how it was going to saddle students with extra debt. Indeed, the PBO says that an additional $10.2 billion worth of debt has been added to Australians by having this program. I just don't understand why there's no urgency to actually deal with the root cause. Yes, the 20 per cent wiping of student debt is very welcome for people who have a HECS debt, but, if you are starting in the humanities next semester or have started in even the last little while, this doesn't really help at all. So when will the government move from going for the headline to going for some serious, hard reform, which is so overdue in the university sector?
      • If you speak to almost any vice-chancellor across the country, one of the first things they raise is Job-ready Graduates. It's not working. Your government knew that while you were in opposition and you've known that for the last three years. Rather than getting on with redesigning that program, you've punted it to another body and said that that piece of work can happen down the track. When will the Labor government get serious about reform in this area, when it comes to Job-ready Graduates and saddling students with more debt?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:17 2 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:17 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Pocock. We are very serious about reducing student debt. That's exactly why we're here in the chamber today with a bill that does what we, before the election, said we were going to do. We said we were going to wipe 20 per cent off student debt, and that is exactly what we are doing. That's $512 thousand for the average person with a HECS debt of about $27,000. We think that that is really significant assistance to people. We said we were going to wipe 20 per cent off student debt, and that's the bill that we have in front of us today. It's really going to help young Australians who are just starting out in life.
      • In addition, with this bill, we are making the other reforms that I've already spoken about, which are the increase to the minimum repayment threshold and the marginal repayment reform, which Professor Bruce Chapman, the architect of HECS, has said is the most significant reform since the system was introduced. So we are making significant reform and we are doing what we said we were going to do. We have a bill in front of the parliament that the people of Australia have voted for and supported. In relation to further recommendations from the universities accord -- a big body of work that we did that is more than one budget and more than one MYEFO but a blueprint for the future of higher education -- we look forward to working with Professor O'Kane and ATEC to continue to progress those recommendations.
    • Richard Dowling, Tasmania, ALP, 11:19 4 min [7]
      • Tasmania 11:19 () (): I, too, note that this is not my first speech. It is worth pausing on the significance of this. This is the first piece of legislation tabled by the Albanese government in the 48th Parliament. That's no accident. It's a deliberate choice by a government determined to set the tone -- a tone of fairness, of vision and of investment in the future of this country.
      • Labor recognises that many young people are facing cost-of-living burdens that were not faced by their predecessors. We want to ease these burdens because we need students to understand that they have a stake in our country. When they feel that sense of stake, they contribute that back tenfold. That's what improves intergenerational equity.
      • The headline-grabber in this bill is the 20 per cent debt-wipe. Less talked about, but equally impactful, are the structural changes regarding the minimum payment thresholds that the minister has outlined and how much you will need to repay and when. The bill does raise the trigger threshold from $54,000 to $67,000. Previously that $54,000 was not too far above the annual minimum wage. So, effectively, you were starting to pay HECS immediately, on the lowest of incomes. Raising this payment threshold, as the minister, Jason Clare, put it, means that you start paying off your uni degree when your uni degree starts paying off for you.
      • As well, we're replacing the current repayment system with a new marginal repayment system. Unlike the previous arrangement, the new system proposed in this bill will mean that nobody will take home less money after a pay rise. This is a recommendation supported, as we've heard, by the architect of HECS, Professor Bruce Chapman, who said we should have done it years ago. We're doing it now. And it has taken an Albanese Labor government to deliver it -- promise made and promise kept.
      • If you spend even a few minutes on social media, you will see post after post from young Australians sharing their struggles -- people working multiple jobs while studying; people who see the dream of homeownership slipping further out of reach; people who are doing everything right, yet feel they're just treading water. This bill is an investment in those people who have taken the brave step of investing in their learning and their future, and we should all support that.
      • Minister, as a senator for Tasmania, I'm very keen to understand what this will mean for those students in my home state who have a debt. My understanding is that the average outstanding debt in Tasmania is around $23,000 and that a 20 per cent reduction in that debt is worth more than $412 thousand to each of the 50,000 Tasmanians who will benefit. If we look a bit further afield, in Victoria this bill will wipe $4.7 billion of debt for the 805,264 young Victorians with a HECS debt -- including the 17,719 Victorians in the electorate of Corangamite, who, if Senator Henderson had had her way at the election, would have not got this debt reduction at all.
      • So, Minister, what impact will these changes have on Australian students, including those in Tasmania and Victoria, now and into the future?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:23 1 min [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:23 ( -- ) (): Thank you very much, Senator Dowling, for the question. You said that too many young Australians are treading water right now with the debt that they have, and that's why we made this commitment to cut student debt by 20 per cent. It's why the Prime Minister said it would be the first order of business for the parliament, and that's exactly why we're here. It's great to hear that, for those people in your great home state of Tasmania, the average debt relief will be around $412 thousand. I'm sure your constituents in Tasmania are really pleased that the government is doing exactly what we said we were going to do.
    • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 11:24 4 min [9]
      • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 11:24 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Minister. I appreciate that, but I just wanted to bring you back to the Australian Universities Accord. From my reading of it, the very first recommendation, the first mention of reform, is replacing the Job-ready Graduates Package. And I'd just like to impress on the Senate how urgent this task is. It's all good to be wiping 20 per cent of student debt, but, going forward, where is the equity in our system? Why are we penalising students that happen to choose certain courses that are now double the price? Where is the courage from the Albanese government to take on hard reform?
      • I want to read for the Senate what the universities accord had to say about replacing the Job-ready Graduates Package:
      • The JRG package needs to be replaced. Its purpose of providing price signals to influence student subject choices has failed --
      • Labor told us this when they were in opposition. We're now into their second term, and JRG remains in universities --
      • Only 1.5% of students applied to enrol in courses they would not have applied for under the pre JRG student contribution arrangements. It has left some students facing extremely high student contributions and large HELP debts that do not reflect their future earning potential, and tilted the overall cost burden of higher education further on to students and away from the Australian Government.
      • There is obviously a cost to reforming JRG. The government is sort of acknowledging that by wiping 20 per cent of student debt. But this is the job of government. Surely, that is why governments are elected: to actually take on hard reform. To go back to the accord:
      • Particularly significant was the 113% rise in student contributions for students studying communications, humanities, other society and culture, and human movement. By cutting student and Commonwealth contributions in other disciplines, the JRG package also reduced the amount of funding available to ... engineering and mathematics. The Review recommends that the Australian Government reduce student contributions for those affected by JRG and moves towards a student contribution system based on potential lifetime earnings.
      • Yes, this isn't simple -- there's work to do here -- but, please, I urge the Albanese Labor government to get cracking on this. You've had three years. We can't just kick this to another body and have another review. This is urgent for our higher education sector. You just have to look across the country. It is struggling. It is struggling to actually undertake its mission of educating Australians and undertaking really important research.
      • We went through this with what I think was the really ill-conceived ESOS bill, where, after a long time of having had funding taken away from them, universities have gone out and relied on international students for cross-subsidisation, for everything from funding research to -- if you look at universities like Western Sydney University -- equity programs, providing lunch and food pantries to students who are food insecure. We're not listening to them and saying, 'Let's make your funding model sustainable.' So, again, Minister, could you maybe just outline to the Senate what the government's proposed process and timeline is for reforming JRG.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:28 2 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:28 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Pocock. Well, we are here in the chamber today with a bill that cuts student debt by 20 per cent, that cuts $16 billion of student debt on top of the $3 billion in student debt that we already cut. We are proud of the commitment that we took to the election to do that. We're proud to have this bill in front of the chamber today, and we look forward to the support of the chamber to assist students to have their HECS debt cut by an average of $512 thousand a year for the graduate who has around $27,000 in debt. At the same time, we are also raising the minimum repayment threshold, from $54,000 to $67,000 a year, to allow students to start earning a reasonable wage before they have to start repaying their student debt. Of course, we want people to see their higher education paying off for them before they have to start paying off their HECS debt.
      • You talk about reform, Senator Pocock. Again, we are making one of the most significant reforms in how HECS repayments are made. This reform around a marginal repayment system where HECS repayments are calculated on just the proportion of income above the threshold is really significant -- again, the most significant reform to HECS that we've seen since it was introduced to help people get an education here in this country. In relation to further work, there is always more work to do. We are implementing the recommendations of the universities accord.
    • Charlotte Walker, South Australia, ALP, 11:30 5 min [6]
      • South Australia 11:30 () (): I note that this is not my first speech. Today we have a chance to deliver relief -- real tangible relief -- to over three million Australians by supporting the government's proposal to reduce student debt by 20 per cent. Yet we are being told by some in this chamber and outside it that this move is not good for Australians. I ask you: which Australians are you talking about? For the Australians that I know -- the students struggling in two casual jobs to pay rent, the young families trying to save for a house while paying back debt for degrees they finished years ago and the regional kids who left everything behind just to have a shot at uni -- this 20 per cent reduction will change their lives. It will mean breathing room -- a chance to build, to plan and to contribute more fully to the economy, not five or 10 years from now but now, through lower repayments.
      • Let's be honest: for too long we've told young people that education is a public good while treating their debt like a private burden. Indexation has quietly outpaced wage growth. Their debts have compounded while the previous coalition government allowed wages to stagnate. Students then accrued thousands in interest before they even reached the repayment threshold. The HECS system was morphing from a safety net into a slow anchor, dragging down the very people we rely on to power our future.
      • In Labor's last term, we changed the way HECS is indexed to fix the issue of unfair debt growth, and now, when this government proposes immediate financial assistance -- wiping 20 per cent off that burden -- some dare to say it's not fair. What's not fair is a 22-year-old graduate owing huge and increasing debt for a degree that society demands but refuses to value in dollars. What's not fair is that student debt has grown faster than the housing market and faster than real wages and we've just told young people to keep quiet and keep paying. What's not fair is the fact that people are deferring life milestones -- starting families, buying homes and launching small businesses -- not out of choice but because their debt holds them back. We are not talking about luxuries here; we are talking about dignity, about fairness and about the right to pursue an education without being trapped by it for many years to come.
      • This is not just a policy fix; it is a signal that the government sees them, hears them and values their contribution. It's also economically smart. Reducing student debt gives young Australians more spending power, more capacity to invest in their future and more confidence in their financial footing. This isn't just a social good; it's economic stimulus. Let's not forget that, when we invest in young Australians, we are investing in nurses, teachers, engineers, scientists and social workers. These are not future hypotheticals; these are the very people holding up our society today, and we owe them more than silence.
      • So, no, I will not just sit here while some pretend that student debt relief is a handout. It is a correction, and it is about restoring faith in government education policy. By backdating the cut in debt to 1 June, we are fulfilling our campaign promise -- a promise we made to Australians and promise they voted for. To disregard the wishes of Australians is undemocratic. It is an insult to our political system and the core of Australian values. To those who claim this is not good for Australians I say this: young Australians are not a side issue. They are not a future issue. They are Australians now. This policy -- this 20 per cent reduction in HECS debt -- is something we are doing for their future and for ours. Support this measure and give these Australians a fair go. Let this chamber send a clear message today that we don't just talk about opportunity, we deliver it, that when young Australians speak, we listen, and that their future is worth fighting for, because it's our future too.
      • My question for the minister is: what will the proposed changes mean for students and young Australians right across the country, and why has the government taken this approach?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:35 1 min [4]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:35 ( -- ) (): Thank you so much, Senator Walker, and thank you for bringing the voices of young Australians to the chamber today. We look forward to your advocacy on this issue, on other issues facing young Australians and, indeed, on all of the issues that you bring your voice to in our parliament.
      • Young Australians can look to benefit from this bill that is ahead of the parliament today. This is a bill that cuts student debt by 20 per cent. When somebody leaves university and they end up with the average HECS debt that people have today, of around $27,000, they'll see $512 thousand taken off their HECS bill. That's what young Australians will see. They'll also see a government that is doing exactly what we said we were going to do.
      • I remind the chamber that we do have a question before the chair, and that is the amendment moved by Senator Henderson. Debate has become pretty wide ranging, rather than on that amendment.
      • Interjection / Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
    • Pauline Hanson, Queensland, PHON, 11:36 6 min [7]
      • Queensland Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation and Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip 11:36 ( -- ) (): I want to put on the record how One Nation feels about this, and my feelings about this. I understand that, with the cost of living, people and families are doing it tough out there. The government has actually said, 'We gave taxation relief of $5 a week.' That was fantastic. Maybe they're not going to be paying $7 for their coffee now; they're going to be paying $2. But that's what it averages out as -- one cup of coffee.
      • This is purely about buying the vote of the younger generation. That's all this is. What you've done here is say to them, 'We're going pay off your debt.' Forget about all the other Australians out there who are struggling and want to see benefit for their taxes. What we're going to see here -- for the people in the gallery, and I think they need to understand this -- is this government adding a $16 billion debt by wiping 20 per cent off the debt of students. We are already owed $81 billion in debt from HECS debts. This is another $16 billion. Yes, people are doing it tough out there, but the fact is that we cannot keep paying. People have to have skin in the game.
      • What I'm hearing and seeing is that too many people just say, 'I'm going to university.' They haven't got the grades. They shouldn't be at university and they're not academically minded, but we push them through a system, and the taxpayer is paying for it. This is only going to put more debt onto a lot of those people. On the PBO's modelling, if you have a graduate with a low income of 50 per cent of an average graduate income upon completion of their degree falling below the new minimum repayment threshold, it will take another approximately eight years to pay off their repayments. This will add approximately another $21,467 to their repayments. Do they know that? You're not helping a lot of people out there at all.
      • You're raising the threshold from nearly $5412 thousand up to $67,000 before they start paying back their debts. I bring your attention to the Family Law Act. Under that act you force a parent to pay back payments to the other parent at $27,000, but you're going to raise the minimum HECS repayment threshold to $67,000 before they even pay anything back. This is going to give relief to those people out there who have passed their degrees, PhDs, on really good incomes -- about 55,000 people -- a cut of about $25,000 a year. Why should someone who's a tradie -- who, at 15 or 16, got in to become a tradesperson -- now have their taxes go to someone who will, if they get their studies done, possibly end up getting a well-paid job? We're going to give them that relief.
      • I put it to the public that if you go to the bank because you want to get a loan, you say, 'This is what my income is, and this is what I can pay back,' and they stipulate what your repayments must be. If you go to the bank and say, 'Listen, mate, I want a 20 per cent reduction on my loan,' do you think you're going to get it? Do you honestly think that the taxpayer should be providing that? You knew the terms of the agreement when you signed up to this. It should not be going back to other people that owe money to the taxpayers. We have hospitals, education, infrastructure -- failing systems. We are in one hell of a mess. People are homeless.
      • Bringing this in was a vote-buyer for the Labor Party. I've got no problem with helping those who need that helping hand, but vote-buyers are all the government ever does. They cheat the people and expect others to pay the cost for it. The people of Australia can't keep affording this time and time again. Under Labor, the cost of health has gone up 13 per cent; food, 14 per cent; rent, 18 per cent; and insurance, 36 per cent. I will be supporting Senator Henderson's amendment to this bill because I think it's going to be very good for this. One Nation will not be supporting this bill as a whole, because I think it's an absolute disgrace and a vote-buyer to get the young ones engaged. It's more handouts, and taxpayers can't afford it, so we will not support the bill as a whole.
      • Minister, what are you going to do in the future to rein in those people who still owe money? You're blowing it out. As I said, it's going to blow out by eight years. How are you going to address the fact that these people will have longer-term debt and another $21,000 on their debt? How do you intend to deal with that? Because that's what you're doing here. You're adding years to the debt and another $21,000 for those who don't reach that income. What are you going to do to address that?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:42 3 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:42 ( -- ) (): Thanks very much, Senator Hanson. You talked about people who don't go to university in your question, and also people who do, and how this affects them. I want to be really clear that this bill applies to people who have loans that they have accrued through vocational education and training as well as through their apprenticeship loans. It's really important that those Australians also get the 20 per cent cut on their VET course debt and on their apprenticeship debt. We are also extending free TAFE to hundreds of thousands of Australians and benefiting hundreds of thousands of people through both of those measures.
      • The government is providing considerable cost-of-living relief that goes to all Australians on a range of measures and in a range of ways. In terms of how the repayment methods that we are introducing help people, in addition to cutting $16 billion of debt, 20 per cent debt relief for three million Australians, we are raising the minimum repayment threshold to $67,000 a year. That means people get to earn more before they have to start dealing with their debt. When they do reach that threshold, their HECS debt repayments will only be calculated on the proportion of their income that is above that threshold, and that is going to give people quite a significant saving. For example, someone earning a few thousand dollars above the threshold -- say, $70,000 -- will have their compulsory repayments reduced by $1,300 a year down to just $450 a year, which is a really huge benefit to those people. Of course, the term 'compulsory repayments' is really important. People can make voluntary repayments to reduce their debt at any time they would like to. Again, this is really significant reform -- 20 per cent off HECS, $16 billion wiped in addition to the $3 billion wiped in the previous parliament, helping three million Australians.
    • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 11:45 [1]
      • Queensland 11:45 () (): Minister, you talked about government providing cost-of-living relief. Where does government money come from?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:45 1 min [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:45 ( -- ) (): The bill before us reduces HECS debts by 20 per cent, and it's $16 billion out of the accounts of Australians who have a HECS debt. The way in which that will be provided for is through the budget, and it's a fully costed policy in the budget.
    • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 11:46 [1]
      • Queensland 11:46 () (): I'm not asking if it's fully costed, and I understand what's involved with the bill. I asked you a specific question: where is government money coming from to pay for government providing cost-of-living relief? Where does the government money come from that pays for the HECS debt cut? What makes up government money? That is fundamental, but the government doesn't understand that. Neither did you predecessors. If you don't understand where government money comes from, how the hell can you justify spending it?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:46 1 min [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:46 ( -- ) (): This is a commitment that we took to the Australian people at the election. The Australian people voted for it. We have a bill in front of the chamber. We look forward to support for the bill.
    • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 11:47 [1]
      • Queensland 11:47 () (): So you don't know, it seems, that government money comes from taxpayers. It is taxpayer money, not government money. This is so infuriating. You're destroying the country. You also talk about cost-of-living relief from government policies. Where is the money for cost-of-living relief coming from? I'll tell you where it's coming from -- it's coming from taxpayers. Am I correct?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:47 1 min [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:47 ( -- ) (): This is a commitment that the government took to the Australian people. It is funded through the budget. There are a range of revenues for the budget. The government took this commitment to the election. The Australian people supported it. We have a bill in front of the chamber. This is a bill that will reduce student debt by 20 per cent. It will wipe $16 billion of debt from people's HECS accounts, VET accounts and apprenticeship accounts. We think it's really important that we do exactly what we said we were going to do. That's why it's the first bill that we introduced to the parliament. It will provide significant assistance to three million Australians.
    • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 11:48 [1]
      • Queensland 11:48 () (): Simple question, Minister: are taxpayers on the hook for your 20 per cent cut? Do taxpayers pay it, ultimately? That's all I want to know.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:48 1 min [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:48 ( -- ) (): There are a range of revenues that support the budget. The policy is fully costed. It's been put to the Australian people. It's been overwhelmingly supported. We are here today to consider a bill that reduces student debt by 20 per cent. Like many government measures, this measure is provided for in the budget.
    • Pauline Hanson, Queensland, PHON, 11:49 2 min [2]
      • Queensland Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation and Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip 11:49 ( -- ) (): Minister, my understanding of the bill -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- is that there is $81 billion that's already owed in HECS and HELP debts, and you are going to give that 20 per cent relief to those people. One thing that has been brought to my attention is of a person who has racked up an $800,000 HECS debt. Will they also be getting a 20 per cent relief on that $800,000 HECS debt? Also, I'd like to know, if a person has taken a HECS debt -- why have we got 'professional students', who finish a course, go on to do another course and become professional students, that are constantly taking out debt all the time now being relieved by the taxpayer? Why shouldn't they have to do one course and pay back the taxpayer, or attempt to pay back the taxpayer, rather than become professional students who are feeding off of the welfare of the taxpayer and now getting relief? So there is the $800,000 -- are they going to get a tax relief of 20 per cent off their debt?
      • Also, I want to know: if you thought this was a good scheme, why didn't you start moving this forward from now for those going to university with a HECS debt? Why did you include those of the past, relieving them of their HECS debt, when they've already signed the contract and knew they had to pay back the taxpayer? Who are you going to give this 20 per cent tax relief to? Everyone who has got a HECS debt?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:51 [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:51 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Hanson. Your question goes to people with significant HECS debts, and it's important to know that those sorts of HECS debts that you've referred to can no longer be accrued. There are measures in place to stop that sort of debt from accruing. In terms of the benefit of the bill to cut student debt by 20 per cent, it does apply across the board to the amount of debt that was in student accounts, or in those HECS accounts, on 1 June 2025, and 70 per cent of the benefit goes to people on really modest incomes of around $70,000 a year.
    • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 11:51 2 min [1]
      • Queensland 11:51 () (): Minister, in response to my question about whether or not taxpayers are paying for the bill, you have not answered that question. Instead, you've used the word 'revenues' or 'diverse revenues', fully costed. Are you not aware that taxpayers are paying for this? Taxpayers are paying for it. What you've also mentioned is cost-of-living relief. The cost of living is rising dramatically because of government policies -- your predecessors' and your own. So what we've got is net zero, the Paris agreement and driving up the cost of living, and then we get the cost-of-living bill, which is paid for by who? Taxpayers. And then we have HECS relief because of the cost of living, which is paid for by taxpayers. We are on a money carousel buying votes. That's what Labor is doing. It is a money carousel buying votes, taking money from one pocket to the next pocket. But both pockets are from the taxpayers. Minister, are you not aware that taxpayers fund this government?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:53 [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:53 ( -- ) (): Senator Roberts, I refer you to my previous answer, and I note that you made comments about the cost of living under this government. Again, when we came into office in May 2022, inflation as measured by the CPI had a six in front of it, and today the CPI rate over the 12 months to June 2025 was just 2.1 per cent, which is really welcome news for Australians.
    • Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP, 11:53 9 min [3]
      • Victoria 11:53 () (): Chair, noting the current broad-ranging debate, I'm wondering if my amendment could be determined before the committee proceeds to further general debate.
      • If there is nobody seeking the call, then I will put the amendment. The question is that amendment (1) on sheet 3376, moved by Senator Henderson, be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
    • Mehreen Faruqi, New South Wales, AG, 12:02 2 min [131]
      • New South Wales Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens 12:02 ( -- ) (): I move Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3370:
      • (1) Page 22 (after line 30), after Schedule 1, insert:
      • Schedule 1A -- Ending indexation of student debts
      • Part 1 -- Amendments of the Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans Act 2014
      • Australian Apprenticeship Support Loans Act 2014
      • 1 Section 5
      • Repeal the following definitions:
      • AASL debt indexation factor (a) definition of ;
      • CPI indexation factor (b) definition of .
      • 2 Section 5 (definition of index number )
      • Omit "section 33", substitute "section 99A".
      • 3 Section 5
      • Repeal the following definitions:
      • WPI indexation factor (a) definition of ;
      • WPI index number (b) definition of .
      • 4 Section 30 (paragraph (a) of the paragraph beginning "In stage 1")
      • Repeal the paragraph.
      • 5 Subsection 31(1)
      • Omit all the words before the method statement, substitute:
      • former accumulated AASL debt (1) A person's , in relation to the person's accumulated AASL debt for a financial year, is the amount worked out using the following method statement.
      • 6 Sections 32, 33 and 34
      • Repeal the sections.
      • 7 Subsection 99(5) (note)
      • Omit "section 33", substitute "section 99A".
      • 8 After section 99
      • Insert:
      • 99A Meaning of index number
      • index number (1) The for a quarter is the All Groups Consumer Price Index number, being the weighted average of the 8 capital cities, published by the Australian Statistician in respect of that quarter.
      • (2) Subject to subsection (3), if, at any time before or after the commencement of this Act:
      • (a) the Australian Statistician has published or publishes an index number in respect of a quarter; and
      • (b) that index number is in substitution for an index number previously published by the Australian Statistician in respect of that quarter;
      • disregard the publication of the later index number for the purposes of this section.
      • (3) If, at any time before or after the commencement of this Act, the Australian Statistician has changed or changes the index reference period for the All Groups Consumer Price Index, then, in applying this section after the change took place or takes place, have regard only to index numbers published in terms of the new index reference period.
      • Part 2 -- Amendments of the Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • 9 Section 129-1
      • Omit ", or the indexation of that debt,".
      • 10 Paragraph 140-1(2)(a)
      • Repeal the paragraph.
      • 11 Subsection 140-5(1)
      • Omit all the words before the method statement, substitute:
      • former accumulated HELP debt (1) A person's , in relation to the person's *accumulated HELP debt for a financial year, is the amount worked out using the following method statement.
      • 12 Subsection 140-5(1) (example)
      • Repeal the example, substitute:
      • Example: Lorraine is studying part-time for a Degree of Bachelor of Communications. On 1 June 2013, Lorraine had an accumulated HELP debt of $15,000. She incurred a HELP debt of $1,500 on 31 March 2013. She made a voluntary repayment of $525 on 1 May 2014. Lorraine lodged her 2012-13 income tax return and a compulsory repayment amount of $3,000 was assessed and notified on her income tax notice of assessment on 3 September 2013.
      • To work out Lorraine's former accumulated HELP debt on 1 June 2014:
      • Step 1: Take the previous accumulated HELP debt of $15,000 on 1 June 2013.
      • Step 2: Add the HELP debt of $1,500 incurred on 31 March 2013.
      • Step 3: Subtract the $525 voluntary repayment made on 1 May 2014.
      • Step 4: Subtract the $3,000 compulsory repayment assessed on 3 September 2013.
      • Steps 5 and 6: Do not apply because since 1 June 2013 Lorraine had no amendments to any assessment.
      • Lorraine's former accumulated HELP debt on 1 June 2014 is:
      • ($15,000 + $1,500) -- ($525 + $3,000) = $12,975
      • 13 Sections 140-10, 140-20, 142-10 and 144-5
      • Repeal the sections.
      • 14 Section 198-1 (note 1)
      • Repeal the note, substitute:
      • Note 1: A different method of indexation is used for the indexing of HELP repayment thresholds under section 154-25.
      • 15 Section 206-1 (table item 2AA)
      • Repeal the table item.
      • 16 Subclause 1(1) of Schedule 1
      • Repeal the following definitions:
      • CPI indexation factor (a) the definition of ;
      • HELP debt indexation factor (b) the definition of ;
      • WPI indexation factor (c) the definition of .
      • Part 3 -- Amendments of the Social Security Act 1991
      • Social Security Act 1991
      • 17 Section 19AA (definition of HELP debt indexation factor )
      • Repeal the definition.
      • 18 Section 1061ZVEA (paragraph (a) of the paragraph beginning "In stage 1")
      • Repeal the paragraph.
      • 19 Subsection 1061ZVEB(1)
      • Omit all the words before the method statement, substitute:
      • former accumulated SSL debt (1) A person's , in relation to the person's accumulated SSL debt for a financial year, is the amount worked out using the following method statement.
      • 20 Section 1061ZZEP
      • Repeal the section, substitute:
      • 1061ZZEP How to work out FS debt
      • The FS debt is the amount outstanding under the contract at the termination date.
      • 21 Subsections 1061ZZER(2) and (3)
      • Repeal the subsections, substitute:
      • accumulated FS debt (2) A person's referred to in subsection 1061ZZEQ(2) is an amount worked out by adding together:
      • (a) the person's adjusted accumulated FS debt on the earlier date; and
      • (b) any FS debt, or the total of any FS debts, of the person that did not exist on the earlier date.
      • 22 Section 1061ZZET
      • Repeal the section.
      • 23 Subsection 1061ZZEU(3)
      • Omit "1061ZZET", substitute "1061ZZES".
      • Part 4 -- Amendments of the Student Assistance Act 1973
      • Student Assistance Act 1973
      • 24 Subsection 3(1) (definition of HELP debt indexation factor )
      • Repeal the definition.
      • 25 Section 9A (paragraph (a) of the paragraph beginning "In stage 1")
      • Repeal the paragraph.
      • 26 Subsection 9B(1)
      • Omit all the words before the method statement, substitute:
      • former ABSTUDY accumulated SSL debt (1) A person's , in relation to the person's accumulated ABSTUDY SSL debt for a financial year, is the amount worked out using the following method statement.
      • 27 Subsection 12ZF(1)
      • Repeal the subsection, substitute:
      • FS debt (1) If, at the end of the contract period in relation to a financial supplement contract between a participating corporation and another person, there was an amount outstanding under the contract, the person incurs on 1 June immediately following the end of that period a debt () to the Commonwealth equal to that amount.
      • 28 Subsection 12ZF(3)
      • Repeal the subsection, substitute:
      • the later date the earlier date accumulated FS debt (3) If an FS debt or FS debts of a person that existed on 1 June in a year () are, or include, an FS debt or FS debts that existed on 1 June in the immediately preceding year (), the person incurs on the later date an to the Commonwealth worked out by adding:
      • (a) the adjusted accumulated FS debt at the earlier date; and
      • (b) any FS debt, or the total of any FS debts, of the person that did not exist on the earlier date.
      • 29 Subsections 12ZF(6), (6A), (7), (7A) and (7B)
      • Repeal the subsections.
      • Part 5 -- Amendments of the VET Student Loans Act 2016
      • VET Student Loans Act 2016
      • 30 Section 23CA (paragraph (a) of the paragraph beginning "In stage 1")
      • Repeal the paragraph.
      • 31 Subsection 23CB(1)
      • Omit all the words before the method statement, substitute:
      • former accumulated VETSL debt (1) A person's , in relation to the person's accumulated VETSL debt for a financial year, is the amount worked out using the following method statement.
      • 32 Subsection 23CB(1) (example)
      • Repeal the example, substitute:
      • Example: Lorraine is studying part-time for a Diploma of Early Childhood Education and Care. On 1 June 2020, Lorraine had an accumulated VETSL debt of $15,000. She incurred a VETSL debt of $1,500 on 31 March 2020. She made a voluntary repayment of $525 on 1 May 2021. Lorraine lodged her 2019-20 income tax return and a compulsory VETSL repayment amount of $3,000 was assessed and notified on her income tax notice of assessment on 3 September 2020.
      • To work out Lorraine's former accumulated VETSL debt on 1 June 2021:
      • Step 1: Take the previous accumulated VETSL debt of $15,000 on 1 June 2020.
      • Step 2: Add the VETSL debt of $1,500 incurred on 31 March 2020.
      • Step 3: Subtract the $525 voluntary repayment made on 1 May 2021.
      • Step 4: Subtract the $3,000 compulsory repayment assessed on 3 September 2020.
      • Step 5: Does not apply because since 1 June 2020 Lorraine had no amendments to any assessment.
      • Step 6: Does not apply because since 1 June 2020 Lorraine had no amendments to any assessment.
      • Lorraine's former accumulated VETSL debt on 1 June 2021 is:
      • ($15,000 + $1,500) -- ($525 + $3,000) = $12,975
      • Part 6 -- Application provisions
      • 33 Application of amendments
      • The amendments made by this Schedule apply in relation to working out an amount of debt as at 1 June 2025 and as at a later time.
      • This amendment actually removes indexation for all student debts. It won't cap the debts. It won't take the lower of CPI or WPI, because that's still unfair and adds masses of debt for students -- debt that actually shouldn't exist.
      • The government's attempt to deal with runaway indexation has totally failed -- I agree with Senator Henderson on that one -- because Labor's so-called solution still means that the mountain of student debt keeps growing every year, even when people are not earning enough to pay it off. Labor's move to tie indexation to the lower of CPI or WPI still resulted in a student debt increase of 15 per cent between 2022 and 2025. This is completely unsustainable. And a one-off 7.9 per cent debt cut won't fix it, because indexation will quickly offset this debt relief.
      • If Senator Henderson is -- and, indeed, if the coalition are -- serious about doing something for students, they can actually support this amendment to scrap indexation altogether. I guess it is good to see them coming on to the side of students, because what they did a few years ago was to introduce the worst, crappiest, messiest piece of legislation -- the job-ready graduates bill -- which increased fees for students. Arts degrees, because of that, are now $50,000. So maybe the coalition can support this amendment and also my next amendment -- to dump the jobs-ready-graduates fee-hikes -- because, as long as indexation exists, young people will be stuck on the student-debt hamster-wheel, struggling to keep up with annual hikes. Indexation lengthens and grows student-debt sentences. It needs to go, and I urge senators to support this amendment.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 12:04 8 min [4]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 12:04 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Faruqi for her amendment. The government will not be supporting this amendment. I note that abolishing indexation was considered by the Senate Standing Committees on Education and Employment in 2023. The committee recommended that the Senate not pass that bill. Indexation plays an important role in ensuring that loans maintain their real value over time and reinforces the long-term financial sustainability of the HELP system and other loan systems.
      • The government recognised that the system could be better and fairer. That's why, last year, we passed legislation to cap indexation to the lower of CPI and WPI, and backdated that change to 1 June 2023. That cut around $3 billion in student debt for more than three million Australians. It ensures that debts won't grow faster than wages in the future. Our changes provide relief for students and young people while continuing to protect the integrity and value of the HECS system, which has massively expanded higher education access for millions of Australians. This bill wipes another $16 billion from student debt and delivers important structural reforms to repayments, which will benefit generations to come.
      • The question is that Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3370, moved by Senator Faruqi, be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
    • Mehreen Faruqi, New South Wales, AG, 12:12 1 min [40]
      • New South Wales Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens 12:12 ( -- ) (): I move Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3371:
      • (1) Page 33 (after line 22), at the end of the Bill, add:
      • Schedule 3 -- HELP debt indexation to account for withholding amounts
      • Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • 1 Subsection 140-5(1)
      • Omit "is worked out by multiplying", substitute "is the sum of".
      • 2 Paragraphs 140-5(1)(a) and (b)
      • Repeal the paragraphs, substitute:
      • base debt (a) the amount (the person's for the financial year) worked out using the method statement in this subsection; and
      • (b) the person's *indexation amount for the financial year (see subsection (1A)).
      • 3 Subsection 140-5(1) (example)
      • Repeal the example.
      • 4 After subsection 140-5(1)
      • Insert:
      • indexation amount (1A) A person's for a financial year is the amount worked out using the following method statement:
      • Example: Tom is studying for a Bachelor of Laws and Bachelor of International Relations. On 1 June 2024, Tom had an accumulated HELP debt of $15,000. He incurred a HELP debt of $1,500 on 31 March 2024. He made a voluntary repayment of $525 on 1 May 2025. Tom lodged his 2023-24 income tax return and a compulsory repayment amount of $3,000 was assessed and notified on his income tax notice of assessment on 3 September 2024. Between 1 July 2024 and 30 May 2025, Tom had a total of $4,000 withheld from his salary in relation to the collection of compulsory repayment amounts in accordance with section 154-70. Assume for the purposes of this example that the HELP debt indexation factor for 1 June 2025 is 1.030.
      • To work out Tom's base debt for the 2024-25 financial year (before indexation on 1 June 2025), first work through the method statement in subsection (1):
      • Step 1: Take the previous accumulated HELP debt of $15,000 on 1 June 2024.
      • Step 2: Add the HELP debt of $1,500 incurred on 31 March 2024.
      • Step 3: Subtract the $525 voluntary repayment made on 1 May 2025.
      • Step 4: Subtract the $3,000 compulsory repayment assessed on 3 September 2024.
      • Steps 5 and 6: Do not apply because since 1 June 2024 Tom had no amendments to any assessment.
      • Tom's base debt before indexation on 1 June 2025 is:
      • ($15,000 + $1,500) -- ($525 + $3,000) = $12,975
      • To work out Tom's indexation amount for the 2024-25 financial year, work through the method statement in this subsection:
      • Step 1: Take Tom's total withholdings of $4,000.
      • Step 2: Given Tom's total withholdings do not exceed his base debt, subtract all of the total withholdings of $4,000 from the base debt of $12,975 for a base debt less withholdings amount of $8,975.
      • Step 3: Subtract 1 from the HELP debt indexation factor of 1.030 for a result of 0.030.
      • Step 4: Multiply the base debt less withholdings of $8,975 by 0.030.
      • Tom's indexation amount for the 2024-25 financial year is:
      • $8,975 x 0.030 = $269.25
      • Therefore, Tom's former accumulated HELP debt in relation to his accumulated HELP debt for the 2024-25 financial year would be the sum of his base debt and indexation amount as follows:
      • $12,975 + $269.25 = $13,244.25
      • 5 Subclause 1(1) of Schedule 1
      • Insert:
      • indexation amount has the meaning given by subsection 140-5(1A).
      • 6 Application provisions
      • Higher Education Support Act 2003 The amendments of the made by this Schedule apply in relation to working out a person's former accumulated HELP debt in relation to the person's accumulated HELP debt for the first financial year to start after the commencement of this item and later financial years.
      • Let us be clear that student debt cannot be fixed, because student debt really shouldn't exist. The same goes for indexation. It is not a flaw to be tweaked but a fundamentally unjust mechanism. Unfortunately, the Labor government, despite its commanding majority, doesn't have the courage to pursue the ambitious reforms that are needed. But, hopefully, they can support the Greens with this bare-minimum amendment to address a glaring unfairness in calculating indexation.
      • This amendment changes the way indexation is calculated on student debt, because applying indexation to a debt that has already been repaid is plainly unreasonable and unjust. Repayments must be properly counted before any indexation is added. This amendment changes the timing of indexation and offers a modest but meaningful shift towards fairness. I call on the government and others in the chamber to support it.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 12:13 [4]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 12:13 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Faruqi. The government will not be supporting this amendment. As I've said, the Labor government is currently responding to recommendations in the universities accord. We're implementing 31 of the 47 recommendations in full or in part. This includes making the indexation of HELP debts fairer, providing cost-of-living relief for students, supporting people in the outer suburbs and regions to go to university and making structural reforms to our tertiary education system.
      • The universities accord made a number of recommendations in relation to the HELP system, including changing the date that indexation is applied. As the minister has said, the accord 'is not a plan for one budget but a blueprint for the next decade', to help us build a better and fairer education system. This bill wipes $16 billion from student debt and delivers important structural reforms to repayments which will benefit generations to come. The minister has said we'll keep working through the accord's recommendations and we'll take advice from the Australian Tertiary Education Commission.
      • The question is that amendment (1) on sheet 3371 be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Slade Brockman (The CHAIR), Western Australia, LP
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: In Committee
      • Speaker Count: 9
      • Speakers: Mehreen Faruqi (AG); Jess Walsh (ALP); Sarah Henderson (LP); Jonathon Duniam (LP); David Pocock (IND); Richard Dowling (ALP); Charlotte Walker (ALP); Pauline Hanson (PHON); Malcolm Roberts (PHON)
      • Rational Thought Positives: Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "That change applied retrospectively from 1 June 2023 and ensures that HELP debts don't grow faster than wages in the future. This was a recommendation of the universities accord, and the government acted on it."; Jess Walsh (ALP): data with source signal: "Instead of the government providing $331 per week to teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students to offer a bit of support while they're undertaking their prac placements, the coalition wanted to make those students add that cost to their own HECS debt. According to the coalition's costing, that would look like adding $556 million to student debts over four years, driving up their HECS debt, increasing repayment times and reinforcing a fact that young people already knew: the coalition has no interest in supporting students and young Australians whatsoever."; Sarah Henderson (LP): data with source signal: "And let's not forget the changes to the repayment schedule. It's estimated that, for someone earning $70,000 and paying the minimum amount, that repayment will take in excess of 50 years."; Jess Walsh (ALP): data with source signal: "We took it to the election, Australians supported it, and we look forward to having the support of the parliament and the chamber. In relation to the measure that you're talking about, in terms of further changes to indexation and the dates on which indexation occurs, there were a number of recommendations which were made under the universities accord -- a large piece of reform, a big agenda, the biggest review done on the higher education system in 15 years."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "A range of recommendations were made in that accord."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "The bill that we have in front of us today, of course, goes to implementing some of the recommendations of the universities accord."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "We have a bill in front of the parliament that the people of Australia have voted for and supported. In relation to further recommendations from the universities accord -- a big body of work that we did that is more than one budget and more than one MYEFO but a blueprint for the future of higher education -- we look forward to working with Professor O'Kane and ATEC to continue to progress those recommendations."; Richard Dowling (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "Unlike the previous arrangement, the new system proposed in this bill will mean that nobody will take home less money after a pay rise. This is a recommendation supported, as we've heard, by the architect of HECS, Professor Bruce Chapman, who said we should have done it years ago."; David Pocock (IND): source-backed reasoning: "I appreciate that, but I just wanted to bring you back to the Australian Universities Accord. From my reading of it, the very first recommendation, the first mention of reform, is replacing the Job-ready Graduates Package."; David Pocock (IND): source-backed reasoning: "By cutting student and Commonwealth contributions in other disciplines, the JRG package also reduced the amount of funding available to ... engineering and mathematics. The Review recommends that the Australian Government reduce student contributions for those affected by JRG and moves towards a student contribution system based on potential lifetime earnings."; David Pocock (IND): source-backed reasoning: "You've had three years. We can't just kick this to another body and have another review."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "In relation to further work, there is always more work to do. We are implementing the recommendations of the universities accord."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "The government will not be supporting this amendment. As I've said, the Labor government is currently responding to recommendations in the universities accord."; Jess Walsh (ALP): data with source signal: "We're implementing 31 of the 47 recommendations in full or in part."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "This includes making the indexation of HELP debts fairer, providing cost-of-living relief for students, supporting people in the outer suburbs and regions to go to university and making structural reforms to our tertiary education system. The universities accord made a number of recommendations in relation to the HELP system, including changing the date that indexation is applied."
      • Speaker Response Positives: Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:23 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Faruqi for her amendment."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "The question before the chair is that amendment (1) on sheet 3368 moved by Senator Faruqi be agreed to."; Sarah Henderson (LP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "I do note with disappointment Senator Faruqi's comments about not supporting this amendment, and I say: what hypocrisy from the Greens!"; Sarah Henderson (LP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "Senator Faruqi -- through the chair: to be fair, we have been on the same page on the huge escalation in student debt, and, in some respects, particularly on higher education, we've worked quite closely together where we've got mutual interests."; Sarah Henderson (LP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "Now, I get the politics, Senator Faruqi, but what I don't understand is why you would oppose this amendment, because this delivers greater certainty and greater assurance for anyone signing up to a HELP loan."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:41 ( -- ) (): The government will not be supporting Senator Henderson's amendment -- and, by Senator Henderson's own admission, the opposition is clearly not supporting her amendment either."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "In case Senator Henderson wasn't paying attention, last year we capped indexation at the lower of CPI or the wage price index."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "That should be no news to Senator Henderson."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:49 ( -- ) (): Well, Senator Henderson appears to be debating last year's bill, not the bill that is in front of the chamber today."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "I know Senator Henderson has a different proposal now, which is not supported by her own party."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "This is a proposal that Senator Henderson might have taken to her party and to the chamber last year when we passed our legislation to fix HECS indexation."; Jonathon Duniam (LP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "I know -- to disappoint Senator Henderson!"; Jonathon Duniam (LP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "It's not because it's a bad amendment but because we felt that, in terms of this Labor bill which is before us, there would be a better time to deal with the good proposals by Senator Henderson -- something that I think we would certainly like to advance as part of a policy down the track."; Jonathon Duniam (LP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "Things might be better now, but there are things beyond this government's control which have an impact on these arrangements -- to the points made by Senator Henderson."; Sarah Henderson (LP): responded to Jonathon Duniam (LP): "Victoria 11:03 () (): Firstly, I want to thank Senator Duniam for his very kind words."; Sarah Henderson (LP): responded to Jonathon Duniam (LP): "I've worked very closely with Senator Duniam and many other colleagues in relation to this and many other matters in the education portfolio."; Sarah Henderson (LP): responded to Jonathon Duniam (LP): "I particularly want to thank Senator Duniam for his kind words and for the constructive and very close way that we have worked together."; David Pocock (IND): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 11:08 ( -- ) (): I want to thank Senator Henderson for her work on this amendment."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to David Pocock (IND): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:10 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Pocock."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "To respond to Senator Henderson, HECS indexation going forward will, of course, reflect the low inflation that we have and a CPI with a two in front of it."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to David Pocock (IND): "I'll go to some of Senator Pocock's comments now."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to David Pocock (IND): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:17 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Pocock."; Richard Dowling (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "If we look a bit further afield, in Victoria this bill will wipe $4.7 billion of debt for the 805,264 young Victorians with a HECS debt -- including the 17,719 Victorians in the electorate of Corangamite, who, if Senator Henderson had had her way at the election, would have not got this debt reduction at all."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Richard Dowling (ALP): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:23 ( -- ) (): Thank you very much, Senator Dowling, for the question."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to David Pocock (IND): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:28 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Pocock."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to David Pocock (IND): "You talk about reform, Senator Pocock."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Charlotte Walker (ALP): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:35 ( -- ) (): Thank you so much, Senator Walker, and thank you for bringing the voices of young Australians to the chamber today."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "I remind the chamber that we do have a question before the chair, and that is the amendment moved by Senator Henderson."; Pauline Hanson (PHON): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "I will be supporting Senator Henderson's amendment to this bill because I think it's going to be very good for this."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Pauline Hanson (PHON): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:42 ( -- ) (): Thanks very much, Senator Hanson."; Pauline Hanson (PHON): responded to Pauline Hanson (PHON): "Queensland Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation and Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip 11:49 ( -- ) (): Minister, my understanding of the bill -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- is that there is $81 billion that's already owed in HECS and HELP debts, and you are going to give that 20 per cent relief to those people."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Pauline Hanson (PHON): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:51 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Hanson."; Malcolm Roberts (PHON): explicit response signal: "Queensland 11:51 () (): Minister, in response to my question about whether or not taxpayers are paying for the bill, you have not answered that question."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Malcolm Roberts (PHON): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:53 ( -- ) (): Senator Roberts, I refer you to my previous answer, and I note that you made comments about the cost of living under this government."; Sarah Henderson (LP): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "The question is that amendment (1) on sheet 3376, moved by Senator Henderson, be agreed to."; Mehreen Faruqi (AG): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "The government's attempt to deal with runaway indexation has totally failed -- I agree with Senator Henderson on that one -- because Labor's so-called solution still means that the mountain of student debt keeps growing every year, even when people are not earning enough to pay it off."; Mehreen Faruqi (AG): responded to Sarah Henderson (LP): "If Senator Henderson is -- and, indeed, if the coalition are -- serious about doing something for students, they can actually support this amendment to scrap indexation altogether."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 12:04 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Faruqi for her amendment."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "The question is that Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3370, moved by Senator Faruqi, be agreed to."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 12:13 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Faruqi."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Mentor, Mr James Edward / Raff Ciccone, Victoria, ALP, 12:21 9 min [12]
  • Victoria 12:21 () (): I rise today in the Senate with a very heavy heart to mark the sudden and heartbreaking passing of a friend and staff member of mine, James Edward Mentor, last month. What I share today is drawn from the eulogy that I delivered at his funeral, words spoken among his friends and family in honour of a life lived with passion, loyalty and purpose. Jimmy was a cherished mate, a loyal companion, a beloved colleague and a real patriot of the Labor cause. To many of us in Victoria, he was like family. His sudden passing has left a very deep void in our hearts and in our movement.
  • I first met him in the Australian Labor Party just over 19 years ago. We were both members of Young Labor and worked casual roles outside of school. He was a deli assistant at Safeway Middle Camberwell and a very proud union member of the SDA. Jimmy joined the Canterbury branch of the ALP in 2005 and quickly took on several executive roles, including secretary of his branch and the Kooyong FEA, and was elected a delegate to the Victorian Labor state conference. While I wasn't as deeply involved in student politics at the time, I did, however, enjoy the stories that Jimmy and many other Labor Unity luminaries would share over a late night coffee or spaghetti carbonara at the La Notte restaurant on Lygon Street in Carlton, about the battles, mainly against our comrades in the Socialist Left. One thing became very clear from early on: James was a person that I and many others could call, proudly, a friend.
  • In 2009, Jimmy was elected senior vice-president of Australian Young Labor. Some will recall an evening briefing here at Parliament House in Canberra where a New South Wales convener laid down the three Ps of what it meant to be a member of the Right -- progressive, principled and pragmatic -- insisting that we bind together and that it's important that we stay together. Jimmy, however, without missing a beat, responded, 'Yeah, nah, I'm from Victoria, and we don't bind.' As you can imagine, the room burst into laughter. Jimmy had a presence that could light up a room without demanding attention. He had a rare gift: making you feel seen, heard and important just by being himself.
  • He was the very first person that I employed when I was appointed as a senator of Victoria on 6 March 2019. After leaving in 2023 to work with Responsible Wagering Australia, he returned to my office at the start of this year to assist me with the federal election. Jimmy was more than a political ally; he was family. He deeply believed in the labour movement, not as an abstract cause, but as a living, breathing mission to uplift working people, to create fairness and to drive collective action. He lived those values every single day.
  • While completing his arts degree at Monash University, Jimmy served as president of the Monash Labor association, education officer at the Monash Student Association and welfare officer at the National Union of Students. He travelled overseas in 2009 as part of a study tour to Israel with the Australian-Israel and Jewish Affairs Council -- AIJAC -- fellowship program. James was a staunch supporter of the State of Israel and the United States's alliance with Australia, even when those views weren't always shared with comrades in the movement.
  • After finishing at NUS, and his degree in politics, Jimmy worked for former senator Jacinta Collins, first as an electorate officer, then as an assistant adviser focusing on disability in schools. He later held roles at the Catholic education office in Melbourne and worked for several state MPs, including as an adviser to the then Victorian deputy premier and education minister.
  • Outside of work, James had two great loves: sport and history. Watching a game with him was an experience full of passion and sharp commentary. When the match ended, he'd switch seamlessly to a deep conversation about politics, history, or some random stats. Whether it was the AFL, cricket, soccer or rugby, Jimmy was always fully invested. Being part of the Rugby Club of Victoria gave him a chance to give back to a sport that brought him so much fulfilment. He would have had strong words about last weekend's Wallabies-Lions match at the MCG. No doubt, he'd still be fuming about the clear penalty that was not awarded to Australia in those dying minutes. I can just hear him saying, 'If that's not a penalty, what is?' And then there was Aussie Rules footy. A passionate Collingwood supporter through and through, you could spot him on game day with his Magpies scarf wrapped tightly around his neck. He was in his element at the MCG, often with a beer in hand at the Frank Grey Smith Bar in the MCC members reserve, riding every bump and cheering every goal. And, whilst James wasn't always known for his punctuality in my office, when it came to sport, he was always there early, scarf on and ready.
  • During the COVID pandemic, when so many of us felt isolated, we took regular walks during lockdown as we lived nearby. It became a ritual. True to form, Jimmy turned those walks into a journey through time, sharing the rich history of the local area as we wandered the streets of Hawthorn and its surrounds. He'd point out how Hawthorn Creek, now a drain, was once a natural waterway prone to flooding, or he'd show me the old inner circle or Kew train lines. Around this time, James and I became regulars at the Hawthorn RSL, a place where we quickly grew from visitor to valued member. He embraced the subbranch and its members as though he'd been there for many, many years. For Jimmy, it was never about obligation; it was about genuine care for the veterans and the comradery it fostered. From serving on the Melbourne Rebels Rugby Union government subcommittee, to serving as a personal tax advisory group member for the ATO, a Centrelink national student services group member, a City of Melbourne youth safety committee member and Victorian youth convener for the Australian Republic Movement, James gave his all, bringing passion and integrity to every single role.
  • It didn't matter if you were a veteran, a senior staff member or an intern, he treated everyone with the same respect. He was a mentor, not just in name but in action. His sudden passing in June is a heartbreaking reminder of how fragile life can be and how quickly someone, at the age of 38, with so much potential and full of promise, can be taken from us so soon. It was a moment of deep sorrow, but a privilege, to be by his side holding his hand in hospital as he left this world. I hope he knew how deeply he was loved, as was evident at his funeral.
  • To the friend who made burdens feel lighter, to the colleague who always had our back, to the mentor who lifted others quietly and humbly, and to the passionate believer in fairness who inspired us all to act boldly and love deeply -- you are a man who loved history, who loved sport and who loved deep conversation and a beer with friends. Thank you for your unwavering support, old mate. We miss you, we love you and we'll never forget you. May you rest in peace, my mate. Vale, Jim.
  • Senator Ciccone, on behalf of all coalition senators and, I'm sure, everyone in the chamber, please accept our sincere condolences.
  • Interjection / Slade Brockman (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP
• Trade With The United States Of America, Coleman, Emeritus Chief Rabbi Dr Shalom, Cbe, Am, Myanmar / Dean Smith, Western Australia, LP, 12:30 10 min [14]
  • Western Australia 12:30 () (): I want to speak on behalf of Western Australia's livestock producers, who have once again been sold out by the Albanese Labor government. First, Labor moved to shut down the live sheep export trade, a long-established, regulated industry that supports thousands of jobs and communities across Western Australia. That decision ignored evidence, disregarded trading partners and shattered confidence in government decision-making. Now, Labor is doing the same to our cattle producers.
  • The reckless decision to allow United States beef imports into Australia -- including beef processed from cattle originating in Canada or Mexico -- directly undermines Australia's biosecurity and our domestic beef market, and it endangers premium product produced by Western Australian cattle producers, particularly in the north-west of the state. Our northern producers operate to some of the highest biosecurity and traceability standards in the world. Their beef is renowned in international markets. Labor is jeopardising that by opening our market to a beef supply chain that does not meet Australia's rigorous protections. And, as with live exports, it is doing so without proper industry consultation or risk assessment. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has not even met with President Donald Trump since his return to the White House 268 days ago. He has given away access to Australia's beef market without so much as sitting at the table with the President. While the European Union has just concluded a new bilateral trade agreement with the United States, putting their farmers and exporters in a stronger position, Australia remains on the sidelines because the Prime Minister has failed to build this key relationship.
  • This inability to secure a proper trade agreement is actively damaging Western Australian agriculture and businesses and weakening our nation's economic competitiveness. In 2024, WA producers turned off around 657,000 cattle, producing roughly 34,000 tonnes of beef. These are not just numbers; they are the livelihoods from the Kimberley to the Gascoyne. WA livestock producers have already endured the shutdown of the sheep trade. Now they face price pressures, supply chain uncertainty and biosecurity threats from imported beef. Once again, our producers, including in my home state of Western Australia, are being taken for granted by the Albanese Labor government. It's time for the Prime Minister to look our livestock producers in the eye and answer for his government's growing list of broken promises to the people who feed this country.
  • Today I'd like to take time to acknowledge the passing of a man whose leadership extended far beyond his faith community -- that is, Emeritus Chief Rabbi Dr Shalom Coleman, who passed away on 26 April 2025, aged 106. For more than 40 years Rabbi Coleman served as the chief rabbi of the Perth Hebrew congregation. He was a respected religious figure, a civic leader and a proud Western Australian.
  • Born into an orthodox family in Liverpool, England, in 1918, he gained a Bachelor of Arts with honours and a Bachelor of Letters in Hebrew and Ancient Semitic Languages and Egyptology at the University of Liverpool. His education was interrupted by World War II, when he served with the Royal Air Force. He returned to university life in 1945 and, at the same time, worked for the final certificate of Jews' College, London, gaining his rabbinic ordination in 1955 before taking postgraduate studies at Cambridge.
  • In 1961, Rabbi Coleman came to Sydney as Rabbi of the South Head and District Synagogue. He was a member of the Sydney Beth Din, vice-president of the New South Wales Board of Jewish Education and a founding director of the David J Benjamin Institute of Jewish Studies. He established a seminary for the training of Hebrew teachers and lectured in postbiblical Hebrew at the University of Sydney. He received the Sir Robert Waley Cohen Scholarship of the Jewish Memorial Council in London in1964, using it for research into adult education in South-East Asia, Israel and the United States of America. The following year, he became Rabbi of the Perth Hebrew Congregation in Western Australia. Rabbi Coleman obtained land as a gift in trust from the state government for a new synagogue, youth centre and minister's residence.
  • In addition to his service with the Jewish community and maintaining his interest in the area, Rabbi Coleman taught for the department of adult education at the University of Western Australia and served on the Senate of Murdoch University. A proud Rotarian since 1962, he was both Rotary president and governor, as well as vice-president of the Save the Children fund.
  • Despite the changes occurring around him, Rabbi Coleman was a man who stood firm. He met with premiers and ministers, advised governments on issues ranging from education to social cohesion and played a key role in building the multicultural, tolerant Western Australia we are so very proud of today.
  • Rabbi Coleman was a voice for unity in difficult times. When acts of antisemitism appalled the community, he responded not with division but with resolve and calls for solidarity. When tragedy struck abroad or tensions flared at home, he reminded us that democracy, dignity and decency must be our guiding lights. He understood the importance of living values, not just preaching them. He opened the doors of his synagogue to the broader community because he believed, as many of us do, that public faith must lead to public good.
  • We debate many things in this chamber, but behind those debates lies a deeper question: what kind of society are we seeking to build? Rabbi Coleman had a clear answer to that question, one marked by mutual respect, civic responsibility and compassion for all. Western Australia is a better place for his life's work. To all those whose lives were touched by him, I offer our heartfelt condolences. May his memory continue to guide us.
  • This year marks the 10th anniversary of the 2015 general election in Myanmar, an event that, for a brief and hopeful moment, represented a turning point in that country's long and troubled history. Myanmar was under brutal military rule for decades. Even after the formation of a nominally civilian government in 2011, the military retained sweeping control, including a quarter of all parliamentary seats, under a constitution it wrote itself. And yet the 2015 election marked real progress. It was the first genuinely contested national election in a generation. The National League for Democracy, led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, won a decisive mandate. Voter turnout was high, and the military, surprisingly, accepted the result.
  • That election would not have been possible without the resilience of the Burmese people. But it was also supported by international engagement, particularly from Australia. The Australian government provided a total of $5.4 million to support Myanmar's 2015 election, and a bipartisan delegation of Australian parliamentarians, which included me, travelled to Myanmar to witness the event. We assisted in ensuring transparency, credibility and a degree of global attention. It was a meaningful act of solidarity on our part -- a signal that Australia stood with those seeking democratic reform in our region. The delegation's final report noted a peaceful and largely fair process. But it also pointed to serious flaws, especially the disenfranchisement of ethnic minorities and the ongoing power of the military under the constitution.
  • Sadly, those flaws would later be exploited, with terrible consequences. In 2020, the NLD won an even larger majority in another credible election. But in February of the following year, and before the new parliament could convene, the military staged a coup. It arrested leaders, imposed a state of emergency and plunged Myanmar back into repression. Since then, thousands have been killed, tens of thousands have been imprisoned, millions have been displaced and today refugee numbers surge. It is no overstatement to say that the hopes of 2015 lie in ruins.
  • (Time expired) And yet the legacy of that election still matters. Australia has an important role to continue to play, offering humanitarian assistance and supporting international accountability for crimes committed by the military. Importantly for Australian parliamentarians, we must stand united and speak with one voice to restore democracy and human rights to Myanmar.
• Housing / Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP, 12:40 10 min [13]
  • New South Wales 12:40 () (): I rise to make some comments about the nation's housing nightmare and to give a preview as to why the coalition is not of the view that prioritising build-to-rent developments is appropriate in any way. We have a massive failure on housing which starts from the basis that the government has presided over the largest growth in population since the 1950s, but, at the same time, has presided over a collapse in housing completions. We've gone from an average of 200,000 houses a year under the previous coalition government, and now we're down to 170,000 new houses each year, despite having the largest growth in employment since the 1950s.
  • Then we have a massive growth of regulation, with 5,000 new regulations in the last parliament enacted by this government. Now we see the Minister for Housing, Clare O'Neil, the productivity minister and the Treasurer talk about this thicket of regulations. They talk about a thicket. It's a very interesting word, 'thicket'. That thicket was put in place by this government. In three years, it put in place 5,000 new regulations, including 112 thousand new regulations in the Treasury and Infrastructure portfolios, where housing policy resides.
  • Then we have the CFMEU given a green light to get back in business, to get back on track, perhaps. They were given a green light over the weekend to do their worst in New South Wales, and we'll see the CFMEU flags flying atop new apartment builds in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. Every time you see a CFMEU flag, you should be thinking to yourself, 'This is a 30 per cent tax on young people.' Young people will pay 30 per cent extra for the mafia and thuggery and corruption of the Labor Party's CFMEU.
  • Then we have perhaps the saddest stats of all to be recited in these chambers this week in Canberra, in relation to homelessness. I quote the ABC:
  • The number of people accessing homelessness services each month has increased by 10 per cent since Labor was elected in May 2022.
  • This has been a disaster. Beyond the boondoggle of the Housing Australia Future Fund, we have more homeless people than ever before and we are at a decade low in housing completions, despite having the biggest population we've ever had.
  • But what is the priority of this wonderful Labor government? Its priority is to give a big, fat tax cut to foreign asset managers so they can come and build houses in Australia -- homes that Australians will never own. Australians will never own these houses. These are only to be owned by foreign asset managers from any country. They could even be sovereign wealth funds. So that's the starting point. We don't think it's a good idea to prioritise build-to-rent. We actually have no problem with the market deciding, 'We want to build an apartment building, we're going to have build-to-rent and we're going to do that.' We love the market. We think that's a good idea. Fine, you can do that. But we don't think it needs a tax cut.
  • The problem the Australian people have, having had this government for over three years now, is that the government is completely captured by vested interests that they are personally and financially close to. They think, because they've been told so by their mates in the unions, the big super funds and the property industry, that it's a really good idea to give foreign fund managers a tax cut so they can build houses people will never own. Do you know why it's a good idea for them? Because they're going to collect the lower taxation and then all the revenue from leasing houses to Australians. Of course, the poor old Australians become serfs to these people, to these corporates -- foreign fund managers, sovereign wealth funds, whatever. So this is their priority. After presiding over the greatest housing calamity in Australian history, they want to do this -- a tax cut for build-to-rent developments.
  • The superannuation industry is of course one of my favourite groups of people, and, when they were at the Senate inquiry, I asked them whether it was a good idea for the super funds or big institutions to own houses. I said, 'Do you think the Australian people want to rent their houses from a super fund?' And the super fund executive from the association said, 'I think they'd be very happy with institutionally owned residential property.' Well, I think that they are wrong. I don't think it's what most Australians want. I think Australians want to own their own houses. That's what they want. They don't want this American model. They do not want to see the Americanisation of Australian housing. If you're wondering what I'm talking about, in cities like Atlanta, Charlottesville and Jacksonville, institutional investors own 25, 18 and 21 per cent of the houses. That's the Americanisation of Australian housing that the Labor Party want to bring to this great country. That's what they want. That's their agenda -- houses owned by big super funds and all their mates at the unions.
  • So it doesn't need a tax cut. If you want to have build-to-rent, fine, but it doesn't need a tax cut. In fact, Cameron Murray, who's a very interesting economist, told the Senate that you've got the Abu Dhabi Investment Council, which owns the Smith Collective on the Gold Coast, which is 1,251 build-to-rent dwellings. Okay. And he says that it's bizarre that the government wants to prioritise and give foreigners a tax cut when they're already doing it here. So we're trying to make it even easier for them. It's crazy. Build-to-rent, across the board, in Melbourne's Kensington, in Sydney's Zetland -- there are dozens of developments across the country where this is already happening. So I think it's a big problem, and the property industry itself has said of the legislation brought to you by the Labor Party that it's probably not going to work anyway.
  • So that's why we're moving -- in the next sittings, I expect now -- to disallow these regulations, because we need to have an honest conversation with the Australian people about rectifying this situation. It is clear that the only way out of the housing calamity is to build more houses. If people want to build build-to-rent, fine, but it doesn't require a tax cut. But, more broadly, the tradespeople, the builders and the developers -- the people involved in home building -- will tell you that the supply side needs support from the Commonwealth, and that's what we should be having a debate about, as well as sensible ways to help tilt the scales for first home buyers.
  • But we're not of the view that the government should be allowed to be a government for vested interests. Our job is to scrutinise this government. That's what the Australian people would expect. I think the reason this build-to-rent tax concession was held up for a long time in the last parliament was that a lot of others also shared the concern that this is a very unusual priority. It would be an unusual priority to most Australians. When you have a close look at this government and you understand that this is a pattern of its behaviour and that it is very dedicated to specific vested interests, then perhaps it is not surprising, but it is not the right priority. And the message it sends is very culturally jarring, because it's saying that individual Australians are no longer the focus: 'we've given up on you owning your own house, and the only solutions we have left are where someone else owns your house or you co-own the house with the government.' And don't take my word for it. You can take the ABC's data, reported on the ABC, on how bad the situation is. A government that has blown so much hot air on housing and built so much bureaucracy is presiding over not only a massive collapse in construction but also the worst homelessness crisis in history. What more data do you want to see?
  • So I'm surprised that someone of the calibre of the minister hasn't been prepared to look at the housing policies that were inherited from the Prime Minister and come to the realisation that this is not working, so the government needs to course-correct. We will help them do that; but we will also be moving to disallow this very bad law.
• Middle East, Environment / Peter Whish-Wilson, Tasmania, AG, 12:50 10 min [10]
  • Tasmania 12:50 () (): On the evening of Thursday 17 July, just a couple of weeks ago, I attended a peace vigil for Gaza in my home town of Launceston at our beautiful Launceston Town Hall. I was disappointed to learn on the night that the Launceston city council executive had made a last-minute reversal of a decision to allow a light display with the colours of the Palestinian flag on the town hall. It was explained to me by vigil organisers that the executive made this decision on the basis that such a light show would not encourage positive community outcomes or promote community unity. I wrote to both the Launceston city council general manager and the mayor on Friday 18 July and again on Monday 28 July, this week, to seek an explanation of how this decision was arrived at and to request a meeting with them to discuss this. So far, crickets.
  • The Palestinian flag is a powerful and hopeful symbol for a pathway forward for peace. Palestinians have a right to self-determination; they have a right to a sovereign state. Whether it's through a self-determination process that leads to a single free Palestinian state or a two-state solution, either way, it's the most viable pathway forward to end the horrific genocide in Gaza and for long-term peace and stability in the region for both Israelis and Palestinians. Our current government supports a two-state solution, as do many nations around the world, so how can a light show projecting a Palestinian flag that promotes peace and a pathway forward to peace be controversial, not be in the community's interest or not promote community unity? I'm still stumped. I know there are a lot of good councillors on the Launceston city council. I haven't had the opportunity to discuss this with them personally -- or, unfortunately, with the general manager or the mayor either. I ask them to make their voices heard on this issue, if they haven't already.
  • Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International and numerous other global humanitarian organisations, including prominent Israeli human rights organisations, have publicly stated that the Israeli government's actions in Gaza amount to genocide. Thousands of innocent Palestinian children are being starved, bombed and cut down in cold blood while they queue for food. These kids are not Hamas fighters. Israel is acting with impunity. If leaders at a local government level, at a state government level and here in federal parliament don't stand up for these innocent Palestinians and for a long-term pathway for peace, then I don't know who will. It is our moral duty to highlight the need for a pathway to peace and challenge the perpetuators of injustice and those breaking international law. I will leave it at that, in the hope that the Launceston council will get back to me and that I will get to meet with them on this.
  • I want to highlight another issue that is also near and dear to my heart. I was very fortunate, actually, in the last week of the election campaign to go to Lord Howe Island for two days to join the scientific team at Adrift Lab. My friend Dr Jen Lavers; her partner at Adrift Lab, Alex; and their team of scientific volunteers from around the world come to Lord Howe every year to study the shearwaters, which, sadly, pick up a lot of plastic from the ocean. In fact, while I was there, tragically, we had a shearwater that broke a record that had stood for nearly 16 or 17 years of studying these birds -- it had more than 800 pieces of plastic in its stomach. It's hard to fathom that a little bird can actually have that much plastic in its stomach. When they come out of their burrows to take their first flight -- and they've got a two-week window to do that -- of course, they can barely move, let alone fly. Tragically, I got to witness that.
  • Jen recently wrote to me and some of my colleagues to point out something else to us that I think is really important to talk about in the Senate chamber today. Just for the record, Jen is a marine scientist specialising in anthropogenic impacts, using seabirds as sentinels or bioindicators of ocean health. Now, while her team at Adrift Lab do not undertake research on algal blooms, such as we have seen recently -- and it's very concerning that we've had a number of algal blooms off Tasmania's coast, which is an increasing worry for the future -- they do study marine heatwaves and their impacts on seabirds.
  • Fin Review One thing that struck Jen while she was reading the reporting on South Australia's algal bloom, which, I'm pleased to say, has been reported on by reporters across the country, including by those in the press gallery here -- and a shout-out to Phil Coorey for taking such a strong stance on it in the -- was my quote, where I said, 'If sea life was washing up on the beaches of Sydney, there'd be a national outcry.' She said to me: 'Sadly, Peter, this is not the case.' During the summer of 2023-24, Australia's east coast experienced one of the worst marine heatwaves ever recorded, with the Tasman Sea temperature anomaly exceeding two degrees Celsius. The peak of the marine heatwave coincided with the arrival of seabirds into Australia, after they'd migrated over 10,000 kilometres from their overwintering grounds, and peaked again when the adult birds were attempting to feed their chicks. As a result of the rapid and significant rising water temperature in the Tasman Sea, Jen said that he birds' prey, which is fish and squid, shifted lower in the water column or relocated elsewhere. Either way, they suddenly became unavailable, and the birds died of starvation.
  • Australia does not have a national beach bird monitoring program, so Jen -- like she's done on Lord Howe -- on the smell of an oily rag, has set up such a program, using volunteers right across the country. In fact, over 300 observers, volunteers and citizen scientists submitted photos and data to Adrift Lab, and, based on this, over 5,000 seabirds, mostly shearwaters and mutton birds, were recorded dead on beaches from Brisbane to Hobart. Numerous reports were also sent from beaches around Sydney, with dozens of shearwaters reported dead on Bondi Beach, Narrabeen Beach and Manly Beach. In a single day an incredible 99 seabirds were reported washed up, dead, on Dee Why Beach. Despite Adrift Lab's substantial efforts to share this news with the community, local politicians and media, there has been no reporting on it; hence, I'm raising this in the Australian parliament today. This has been very disappointing for Jen and her team, who, as I said earlier, have been spending mostly their own time to monitor this terrible situation and bring it to our attention. Anyway, they, along with their volunteers, have recorded data from over 212 thousand kilometres of Australia's coastline. Dr Jen Lavers' team note that the proportion of birds observed on beaches represents a tiny fraction of the total number that have died on the Australian coastline.
  • You might be wondering, Deputy President, how many seabirds the Adrift Lab team have told us have died on Australia's coastline from marine heatwaves -- the same thing that's causing the toxic algal bloom on South Australia's coast, with the thousands of dead marine creatures washing up and the terrible impact that's having on biodiversity and on local communities and businesses. I know Senator Farrell, as a South Australian, would be very interested in this. The answer to the seabird question is horrifying. From November 2023 to May 2024, more than 612,000 seabirds died on our Australian beaches along the east coast of Australia from marine heatwaves, in Sydney, Brisbane, Hobart and everywhere in between.
  • Why does no-one know about this catastrophic loss of life? It's nearly the same number of wildlife deaths as were attributed to the 2019 Black Summer bushfires. Why does nobody know about this? Well, it's because only a few people have the resources and the motivation to study this. When I look at how much of our last federal budget was spent on the environment, the WWF estimated that 0.01 per cent of our federal budget is spent on the environment. Surely we can do better than that at a time of national crisis. We know we need to monitor what's going on. We need to fund the scientists and the community organisations that are doing this, and we need much better solutions.
  • Lastly, whether it's the devastating loss of coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef or on the Ningaloo Reef on the west coast or the toxic algal bloom in South Australia in an area on the Great Southern Reef that was previously considered a refuge from many of the changes we've seen during climate change -- whatever it is that you're focusing on in the sad decline in our natural world that's happening right before our eyes -- we come back to the fact that we need to reduce emissions. We need to stop all new fossil fuel projects and transition as rapidly as possible to a clean-energy renewable future.
• Yoorrook Justice Commission / Jana Stewart, Victoria, ALP, 13:00 5 min [7]
  • Victoria 13:00 () (): I rise today as a proud Mutthi Mutthi and Wamba Wamba woman and as a Victorian to speak about the nation-leading work that is happening in my home state on the path to treaty, truth and justice. Victoria has led the way. We established Yoorrook, Australia's first truth-telling commission, led by First Peoples. After four years, its work is done. The truth is now on the public record. We now have a shared history of the state of Victoria, and what a wonderful thing that is.
  • Let me be really clear: that work didn't just happen magically. It wasn't luck, and it certainly wasn't fast. It's the result of decades of tireless advocacy by First Peoples in Victoria. It is the result of communities demanding justice long before governments were willing to hear it and of a Labor government choosing to act, not just with words but with law.
  • There's a truth some people still don't know or choose not to see. Victoria was not just touched by the stolen generations; it helped to create them. Victoria was one of the first jurisdictions to pass laws that gave the state the power to remove Aboriginal children from their families -- children taken not for protection but for assimilation, taken without cause, without consent and without return. These weren't isolated incidents; it was government policy. Whole communities were torn apart, culture was deliberately severed, and families were left searching for their children across decades, even to this day. That is a part of our legacy in Victoria, and it's a chapter we cannot look away from.
  • The economic cost of this injustice has been profound. Generations of Aboriginal Victorians were denied access to land, education, fair wages and the opportunity to build wealth like every other Australian. Children removed from their families lost not only their culture and connection but a chance of any economic security. The Yoorrook Justice Commission has made clear that the impacts of dispossession are ongoing and reflected today in income gaps, in housing insecurity, and in reduced opportunities. Justice must include repair, not just social but economic. The trauma of those removals lives on in memory, in policy and in the overrepresentation of Aboriginal children in out-of-home care today.
  • Just weeks ago, Victoria marked a historic milestone with the conclusion of the Yoorrook Justice Commission, which has now placed these truths on the public record. Our task is to face them not with defensiveness but with honesty, humility and action. Yoorrook's work was deep, forensic and uncompromising. Over four years, it heard from thousands, it reviewed thousands of documents, and it delivered two landmark reports -- one setting the public record straight and the other laying out a blueprint for transformation. It found what our communities have long known -- that the experiences of Aboriginal Victorians amount to genocide -- and it made clear that truth must come before justice.
  • But Yoorrook didn't just document the past; it designed a way forward. With a hundred recommendations across land, health, housing, education and justice, it calls for deep reform and a genuine rebalancing of power. That work now falls to government, to the First Peoples' Assembly, to treaty and to all Victorians, because, in Victoria, treaty is not just a hope; it's a legal process backed by legislation set in motion by the Advancing the Treaty Process with Aboriginal Victorians Act 2018 led by the First Peoples' Assembly of Victoria -- a democratic representative body for our people.
  • The assembly has already established a treaty authority, an independent body grounded in First Nations law and cultural authority. It has built the architecture for negotiation, dispute resolution and accountability, and it has done so not by asking for power but by exercising it. That's what makes Victoria's approach different. It's not just consultation but co-design. It's not symbolic gestures but structural change. It's not temporary programs but a generational shift. This is no accident; it is a result of First Peoples organising for decades. It's a result of our elders, who never, ever stop pushing, but it is also the product of a Labor government willing to legislate for truth, for justice and for treaty.
• National Disability Insurance Scheme / Tammy Tyrrell, Tasmania, IND, 13:05 5 min [7]
  • Tasmania Independent TAS Whip 13:05 ( -- ) (): Imagine spending 25 years of your life unable to talk, unable to speak up for what you need. That was life for a young man with autism on Tassie's east coast. Eighteen months ago he could only speak three sentences in total; today he can speak independently, and that's because of the great work he's been doing with his speech therapist, but that might now be taken away from him. On 1 July the National Disability Insurance Agency introduced new measures to cut costs. They chose to slash the travel allowance by 50 per cent for allied health professionals on the NDIS. The NDIA says this is to make sure participants are only paying for the true cost of care, and no-one wants to see vulnerable people be overcharged and taken advantage of. But this change means services to rural and regional areas of Tasmania will stop. It means hundreds of vulnerable Tasmanians will go without care.
  • It's a four-hour return trip from Launceston to Scamander, on the east coast -- $90 isn't enough to cover the costs of that travel. It's not even enough to cover the petrol costs. I've talked to Tassie providers and allied health workers, who are absolutely devastated. They can't absorb these costs. They've been put between a rock and a really hard place. Do they stop looking after some of our most vulnerable people or take on the costs and send their organisations broke? It's an impossible choice, and it's left NDIS participants scared and confused. Imagine being that young man from Scamander and having come so far in 18 months just to have it all ripped away from you by the stroke of a pen, by bureaucrats in Canberra.
  • The NDIS needs to cut spending. You won't see me arguing about that at all. The NDIS costs the government more than Medicare does. It's about to cost more than the age pension. We've got to start being more efficient and sustainable, but there are ways to do that without making cuts that impact on the care people receive.
  • Here are my thoughts on what should be done instead. We should be reusing medical equipment, and wheelchairs are a great example of this. I've heard stories of a child getting a wheelchair on the NDIS, equipped with all the bells and whistles, but, as anyone who's raised kids knows, they grow pretty quick. Suddenly, the child has outgrown the wheelchair, in six months or 12 months, and they need a new one. What you think happens with the old one? There's nothing wrong with it, and it could be used again. Instead, it just gets tossed out and is never used again -- what a waste. Where we can, we should be repurposing medical equipment that's still fit for purpose. Imagine giving that used wheelchair to another child in need at half the price. It would mean they wouldn't be spending as much money from their plan, and we'd be being much more sustainable in the way we reuse and recirculate equipment. It's not a system that can be set up overnight, but it's the perfect place to start to stop leaking money and stop the waste.
  • Another way to save money in the NDIS is to give organisations more flexibility on what supplies can be bought and where they can be bought from. This is just a little example I heard from a physio. Let's say a participant needs a therapy ball. You can get one from Kmart for $13, and we all like going to Kmart. But the NDIS wants these products to come from speciality disability stores, where a therapy ball costs $50 plus postage. There's no difference between the two balls, by the way; they're exactly the same. Sometimes the Kmart therapy ball will be approved; sometimes it won't be. If it's not approved and the physio really wants to save their client money, they will write letters to the plan managers about why the Kmart ball makes sense over the specialty one, but taking time to write the letter costs the client too.
  • Another example I heard from a speech therapist was about communication devices used for therapy. They used to purchase iPads for their clients to run the program they needed. It would cost between $500 and $1,000. The NDIS says that iPads aren't allowed anymore and clients have to buy specialty communication devices. Guess what? That costs four grand. Once again, the client is paying far more than they need to for the equipment that they need. And that means taxpayers are paying more than they should pay too.
  • Fixing the issues with equipment approvals or reusing perfectly good equipment won't happen overnight. That's why it's easier for the NDIS to slash travel allowances and rates for physios. But, if we are going to get the NDIS to a place that's more efficient and more sustainable, this is where we need to start. We need to pull back spending on the NDIS, but there are plenty of ways to do it that won't impact on the care vulnerable Tasmanians receive every single day.
• Renewable Energy, Trade Unions / Ellie Whiteaker, Western Australia, ALP, 13:10 5 min [4]
  • Western Australia 13:10 () (): Collie, in the south-west of Western Australia, has a proud and enduring history as one of our state's great industrial heartlands. For nearly a century, its coalmines and power stations have powered Western Australia, fuelled our economy, provided jobs and sustained a close-knit community. Generations of my family have worked in the Collie coalmines, but the world is changing. Demand for coal-fired power is falling; infrastructure is ageing. When the decision was made to retire Collie stations in a phased and planned approach, it was never going to be a matter of just switching off the lights. It's not just an economic challenge but a deeply human one. The workers and families who have built their lives in Collie deserve certainty, respect and a genuine and just transition, and that is what is being delivered. My union, the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, has stood alongside government, local workers and the community to make sure that's what is being delivered.
  • Union led advocacy has ensured that Collie's workforce has been a part of the decision-making on the future of their town and their industries. It's meant access to upskilling and retraining pathways and an ongoing dialogue to maintain trust and inclusion. They have helped shape a world-leading model of transition that creates real opportunities for workers and their families. Since 2019, unions have worked hand in hand with government, industry, local leaders and the community to build a road map that secures Collie's future. It's been guided by representatives like Darcy Gunning from the Just Transition Working Group. Collie's approach has centred on workers' rights and community decision-making, not imposed change, not just by simply replacing one industry with another but by creating a diversified and thriving economy that gives locals choice and confidence. At the heart of all of this is the understanding that this can't be done by one level of government alone. That's why it's so encouraging to see this government recognising the national scale of this challenge and backing it with serious policy and serious investment.
  • The Net Zero Economy Authority is now tasked with coordinating the transition for workers in coal- and gas-fired power stations around the country. That means working with many communities across our country, just like Collie, to ensure national policy supports local plans. The Albanese government's Future Made in Australia plan is unlocking over a billion dollars to back in green industry like critical minerals, clean manufacturing and low-carbon technologies. That opens the door to federal incentives for projects already underway in Collie. And, just this week, the government has announced a major expansion of Australia's renewable energy underwriting scheme, supporting the deployment of up to 40 gigawatts of large-scale solar, wind and storage projects by 2030. It's exactly the kind of market certainty that industrial towns like Collie need to attract clean investment and futureproof local jobs. What's happened in Collie is more than just a local success story; it's an international blueprint. It's fast becoming a blueprint for the eight million coal workers right around the world facing the future beyond fossil fuels.
  • These initiatives show what is possible when state governments, federal governments, union leadership, the local community and workers come together with the same goal of a fair and people focused transition. It's a model for how we do this right; how we transition communities with respect, with ambition and with solidarity. There is of course more work ahead, but the people of Collie, supported by their unions and Labor, are proving that a just transition isn't a pipe dream; it's a promise.
• Yoorrook Justice Commission / Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 13:15 5 min [5]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 13:15 ( -- ) (): Earlier this month, the Yoorrook Justice Commission, the first formal truth-telling commission of its kind in this country, handed down its final historic reports. Amongst the commission's many findings were that crimes of genocide were committed against the First Peoples of Victoria. The report clearly calls for federal action on land rights, reparations for the crimes committed against us and repatriation of our cultural, secret and sacred objects. This could be a turning point for all people in this country and for the self-determination and independence of First Peoples and First Nations not just in Victoria but across this continent.
  • I want to start at the beginning. Yoorrook means 'truth' in the Wemba Wemba language, a language that is now extinct and one of the many victims of the attempted genocide against the First Peoples of this continent. We talk a lot about truth-telling, but why do we need to tell the truth or have a truth-telling commission? Well, when we talk about the truth of this country, people don't want to hear it. It makes them uncomfortable, so they object to it and they hide it. They call it the 'black armband' version of history. They say it's a history better forgotten, buried, left unsaid. They want to continue the lies, especially in this place. Our leaders have a selective memory, and what they choose to remember and forget is deliberate. It's political and it's a sophisticated effort to distance themselves from atrocities not only committed in the past but which continue to be committed under their watch today.
  • Take, for example, our Anzacs, who have a national day of mourning, a sacred day that recognises their sacrifice, struggle and loss. Few people know that returning First Nations Anzac soldiers were given nothing. They were considered good enough to die for this country, but they were still not good enough to be considered as citizens or granted the same entitlements as their returning white counterparts. Soldier settlement schemes gifted huge parcels of land to white soldiers, yet First Nations soldiers were denied in a continuation of land dispossession and racist segregation.
  • Our leaders not only have a selective memory but a deliberate doublethink. They acknowledge the findings of Yoorrook with bleeding hearts while knowingly upholding and expanding the racist system of dispossession that kills us. If we don't collectively reckon with our history, then how can we understand where we are today? How can we move forward together in healing? That is why truth-telling is urgent. If we don't know where we have come from, how do we know where we are going?
  • I urgently call on this government to follow through on its previous promises to establish a national truth-telling commission. As the Yoorrook Justice Commission said, the past is the present, and the policies of genocide, assimilation and destruction are not behind us. The systemic violence continues to harm our people every day. This genocide continues to traumatise our people, and acknowledging the past is only the beginning. We must hold to account those responsible for the ongoing genocide. Truth-telling alone is not enough. It must be accompanied by change and action that will liberate our people from the colonial shackles and chains once and for all.
• Blair Electorate: Federal Election / Anthony Chisholm, Queensland, ALP, 13:20 5 min [9]
  • Queensland Assistant Minister for Regional Development, Assistant Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Assistant Minister for Resources and Deputy Manager of Government Business in the Senate 13:20 ( -- ) (): I rise to place on the record of the Senate my congratulations to the member for Blair, Shayne Neumann, on his outstanding seventh election victory for the community there. I said during the election campaign that you would be hard-pressed to find a harder-working member of parliament than the member for Blair. In his election victory and the commitments he was able to secure for sporting and multicultural groups, as well as a commitment of $200 million for the Amberley interchange upgrade, were a testament to his work ethic and commitment to delivering for his community.
  • That is why it is with deep disappointment that I place on the record of the Senate some of the misinformation, scaremongering and aggressive behaviour which were employed by those in the LNP during the campaign in Blair. The member for Blair and his campaign team had to put up with some of the worst campaign behaviour I have ever seen in my 20 years as a Labor Party member. Anyone who drove through the suburbs of Ipswich or the Somerset region would have seen the juvenile and misleading attacks on the member for Blair made by those opposite and their mates.
  • There were thousands of corflutes placed on the streets of Blair by those opposite. This included hundreds of plainly bizarre caricatures of Shayne as a Lego character which were illegally authorised by a made-up 'Ian Renkin from Battler Voice'. These were later sanctioned by the AEC and revealed to have been authorised by former Queensland Liberal Party vice-president Graham Young. The same authoriser peddled misinformation on other corflutes, claiming that Labor were going to introduce a tax on utes and that Shayne Neumann was personally responsible for crime in Blair. There were also deeply concerning reports from multiple voters in Blair that received cold calls from individuals who purported to be from the Labor Party pushing divisive issues with voters to turn people off from voting for the Labor Party.
  • It is a credit to the member for Blair and his campaign team that they rose above these lies and misinformation put forward by those opposite. They were laser focused on talking to voters about the issues which mattered to them, delivering more cost-of-living relief, strengthening Medicare with bulk-billing and delivering Shayne's plan for better roads for Blair.
  • Age I would also like to put on record the deeply disturbing relationship between the LNP campaign and the Exclusive Brethren. This was first revealed by the during the election, which reported that members of the Plymouth Brethren Church had been deployed to at least 17 marginal seats across the country, including in the seat of Blair. On the ground, the Exclusive Brethren had rented out multiple mobile billboards and LED message trailers across the electorate which encouraged voters to 'Make Australia happy' and 'Put Labor last'. In addition, it was reported that the Exclusive Brethren had made nearly one million phone calls for those opposite during the campaign.
  • Polling booths in Blair were overcrowded with as many as 20 members of the Exclusive Brethren handing out for the LNP at each polling booth. Their behaviour at polling booths was absolutely atrocious. As the member for Blair recalled in his address-in-reply last week:
  • Exclusive Brethren members stood in front of Labor volunteers and verbally abused them -- men and women -- physically blocked them from handing out how-to-vote cards, filmed Labor volunteers ...
  • When I helped on the Raceview early voting booth, I heard from voters who complained about the intimidating environment heading into the booth and the absurd number of volunteers handing out. The scale of the Exclusive Brethren operation across the country begs the important question: what did those opposite promise the Exclusive Brethren in return for their support on the campaign? If those opposite are committed to renewal, they should come clean in terms of the agreement they reached.
  • I want to again congratulate the member for Blair on his victory. Those opposite threw everything at his campaign and stooped to an all-time low in campaigning. Anyone who was associated with the LNP campaign in Blair should be ashamed of their behaviour and that association. But it still wasn't enough. The member for Blair stood strong. He stood on his principles and track record of what he delivered for his community, and I know that, now that he is re-elected, he will go on to continue to deliver for his community and deliver the election promises that he made as a member of the ALP. Those opposite continue to push the politics of division and commit to scare tactics rather than actually having a meaningful policy offering for the community, but those on this side of the Senate will get on with the job of delivering for Australians and doing what we can to ensure that we're there to help them.
• Schools: Gender And Sexual Orientation / Pauline Hanson, Queensland, PHON, 13:25 5 min [7]
  • Queensland Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation and Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip 13:25 ( -- ) (): I want to give Australian parents examples of what's being taught in our classrooms: 'You can't tell if someone is a boy or a girl by looking at their genitals. You can be a boy but feel like a girl inside. You are assigned male or female at birth, but this can change. Some people feel they did not get a good match with their body parts and they don't want to be called a boy or a girl.' These are just a few examples of the perverse rubbish our children and grandchildren -- in some cases as young as four years old -- are being taught in our schools across Australia. This is ideological indoctrination, not science and not truth. As a grandmother myself, I know this is causing untold damage to our kids. I am raising this issue because I'm immensely concerned that our children's health and wellbeing is being sacrificed for a vicious, hateful ideology trying to remake human beings into its own deviant image. I'm raising it to bring awareness to parents.
  • My seven -year-old grandson recently came home from school and asked his mother, 'Where's your penis?' 'What do you mean?' she asked, reminding him that she is female and females do not have a penis. My grandson then sked his mother where his vagina was. Troubled, my daughter asked him where these questions were coming from and why. 'From school,' he said. He said, 'School told me that you can choose if you want to be a boy or a girl,' and then added that he wanted to know when he gets to choose. Let's think about that for a second. He wanted to know when he gets to choose. All his life up to the age of seven years, he's been told he's a boy. He was reared as a boy, he looks like his father and his brother, he knows he's not like his mother, and now he gets to choose. Now he knows he's a boy -- his parents told him that -- because biological sex can't change because of words or an operation. I wonder if the school is also teaching him, if he then says he has a vagina, how he has a baby.
  • Parents and grandparents across Australia, you need to be aware of this. You need to find out what your children are being taught and take a stand against this perversity. Schools and departments call it 'sexual education'. It is part of the Australian national curriculum, promoting diversity and inclusion. No, this is absolute rubbish. We need to step in now before more harm is brought upon our kids, whether it be in public, private or religious based schools. This is happening everywhere across Australia, and many parents are simply unaware.
  • Parents are being deliberately kept in the dark. This is being delivered, in some instances, by a third-party external provider under various names and banners, including the Growing Up Program in Tasmania or Respectful Relationships in Victoria, which is now extending to Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia. It is all the same: transgender ideology which is pressuring our children and causing great distress and long-term harm. In many cases, no prior consent or permission is obtained from parents to teach this curriculum, and in some cases parents are denied access to or visibility of the content when requested. Why? Because, apparently, it's commercial-in-confidence. Why and how is this allowed? What are they trying to hide? Parents have a right to know what is being taught to their children, and under no circumstances should this be withheld or children be told to keep it a secret from their parents. That's exactly what paedophiles tell their victims. Schools do not have this right.
  • (Time expired) Our schools are being perverted into turning our kids into fodder for gender clinics where they are drugged and butchered. Parents are being backed into a corner and having to resort to school shopping in the hope of finding a principal who is willing to intervene and stop this deviancy. Unfortunately, they are few and far between. More and more parents have lost faith, trust and confidence in the education system and are turning to homeschooling, as they have no other option. In Queensland alone, homeschooling increased by 229 per cent from 2009 to 2014.
  • ( Senator Grogan ): We will now move to two-minute statements.
  • Interjection / Karen Grogan (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), South Australia, ALP
• Treasurer / Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP, 13:30 2 min [5]
  • New South Wales 13:30 Abundance () (): I want to tell you a story about a man from Queensland who was doing a job for the last three years which was somewhat related to government -- in fact, I would say it was quite heavily related to the functioning of Canberra's government. He did that job for three years. Then, after the election that was conducted earlier this year, he read a book from America. The book was called , and this man read this book. After he read this book, he discovered that what he had been doing in the first three years of this job was all wrong -- it was terrible. He read an American book to discover that what he'd being doing in Canberra was actually wrecking Australia. The man's name is Dr Jim Chalmers, who is the Treasurer of Australia.
  • Is he a doctor?
  • Well, he is a doctor; he's a doctor of something. He's read a book and now he's changed his whole view about what's happened in the last three years. He's repudiated three years of Labor government, where they put in place 5,000 new regulations -- and growing. Today we see in the newspaper or on the TV that there are going to be more regulations. Now YouTube is banned. All sorts of websites are going to be filtered by the government. We're going to have more and more regulations. The problem with this is that's not what the book said to do. The book told him that he needed to cut regulations and to abolish the thicket of regulations that he's been talking about alongside the housing minister and Dr Leigh. Maybe this book wasn't actually well thought through, in the sense that he didn't understand what it said. Maybe he needs to read another book because he's at risk of doing again what he did in the first three years, which is more laws, more regulations and more red tape, which is bad.
  • Interjection / Dave Sharma, New South Wales, LP
  • Continue / Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP
• Rivers, Ms Lyn / Marielle Smith, South Australia, ALP, 13:32 2 min [3]
  • South Australia 13:32 () (): It is with great sadness that I rise to speak about the extraordinary Lyn Rivers, president of the South Australian and Northern Territory branch of the SDA, who tragically passed away last week. Lyn was an exemplary leader of our movement and a mentor to many. Deeply committed to the union movement, to retail workers and to her fellow members, she was a part of our union for over six decades. Lyn worked in some of Adelaide's most iconic department stores, including John Martin's, Myer, David Jones and Harris Scarfe. Her commitment to the union movement never faltered. She never missed a meeting. She always stood up for what was right, with both courage and conviction.
  • Elected to the SDA Committee of Management in 2000, Lyn went on to serve as SDA president for almost 20 years. She worked closely with SDA secretaries Senator Don Farrell, Peter Malinauskas, Sonia Romeo and Josh Peak. Collaboratively, she worked with our union to drive meaningful progress and change for all retail, fast-food and warehouse workers. She was fearless in her fight for them. Lyn was a force for our members, fighting to ensure retail workers are treated with the dignity and the respect at work that they deserve.
  • Lyn leaves an incredible legacy to our union and to the broader Labor movement and will always be an inspiration to many. Her commitment, passion, loyalty, focus, fierce spirit and always friendly face will be missed. I extend my heartfelt condolences to Lyn's family and friends, our union movement in South Australia especially, and all those in South Australia who knew Lyn and who loved her.
• Teachers / Penny Allman-Payne, Queensland, AG, 13:34 2 min [3]
  • Queensland 13:34 () (): I rise to speak in support of our public school teachers. Next Wednesday teachers in Queensland will go on strike for the first time in over 15 years, standing together to demand better pay and conditions and recognition for the essential work that they do. As a Queensland public school teacher myself for more than 25 years, I know the commitment and dedication teachers bring to the classroom every day, and for most it's a labour of love.
  • Teachers work tirelessly and passionately every day to educate and support our kids, often in incredibly challenging conditions. Teachers in the public system in particular do the heavy lifting when it comes to improving outcomes for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged students. Yet most public school teachers remain poorly paid and face unacceptable working conditions in a system that on its current trajectory will be underfunded for another decade. It's driving good teachers out of the classroom and disincentivising people from entering the workforce altogether. This is a disservice not only to teachers but to the students who rely on them.
  • Today's NAPLAN results show us what happens when you don't value teaching and learning. While students from more privileged backgrounds continue to perform well, those from disadvantaged backgrounds are falling further behind. If we're to have any chance of reversing this trend and lifting all kids up, we need to invest in our teachers, reward them properly for their work and ensure they have the in-class supports that allow them to do their jobs properly. Teaching conditions are learning conditions. That's why I would urge all Queenslanders to support next week's strike action by Queensland's public school teachers and join their calls for fairer pay and better working conditions -- solidarity with Queensland's teachers.
• Parkinson'S Disease / Wendy Askew, Tasmania, LP, 13:36 2 min [2]
  • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 13:36 ( -- ) (): As the co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Parkinson's group throughout the last parliament, I have seen and heard just how little many Australians know about this disease. Parkinson's is the world's fastest-growing neurological condition, with around 220,000 people living with the condition in Australia, but it remains a mystery to most until they or a loved one is diagnosed. As someone with friends and loved ones living with Parkinson's disease, I can fully appreciate the importance of education and awareness to help equip people with the information they need to manage the condition. That is why I was pleased to learn of the launch of the latest 'massive open online course' focused on Parkinson's disease. A massive open online course, or MOOC, is an online course available for anyone to participate and undertake the course at their own pace on any internet enabled device.
  • The Parkinson's MOOC is purposefully designed to be accessible and practically useful for people with Parkinson's disease and their care partners through to healthcare professionals, support workers, researchers, health policymakers and anyone with an interest. This MOOC, delivered in partnership between the Wicking Dementia Centre, Menzies institute, the University of Tasmania and the Parkinson's Research Foundation, builds on the important work pioneered by Wicking after they launched their Understanding Dementia MOOC. Since its launch in 2013, the Understanding Dementia MOOC has recorded over 330,000 enrolments from around the world, which is absolutely incredible. I am certain that the Parkinson's MOOC will also have a significant response, and I extend my congratulations to the community and industry leaders at Wicking, Utas and Menzies and in the Parkinson's community on this innovative program. It will transform the understanding of Parkinson's for ordinary Australians and contribute to important discourse about how to manage this condition.
• Tasmania: Economy / Carol Brown, Tasmania, ALP, 13:38 2 min [2]
  • Tasmania 13:38 () (): The Albanese Labor government is driving a national push for practical long-term economic reform, reform that lifts productivity, strengthens the budget and improves the lives of working Australians. Later this year, the Treasurer will bring together leaders from business unions, the community sector and key institutions for our national Economic Reform Roundtable. The aim is simple: to build consensus around the kinds of reforms that will make our economy more dynamic, more resilient and fairer. This is not a Canberra conversation; it's a country-wide challenge, and it has to be shaped by the lived experience of people across the nation.
  • That's why I'm proud to say Tasmania is a part of it. On 6 August, the Tasmania federal Labor team will bring together local voices from business, education, the care sector and research for a Tasmanian economic round table in Hobart to talk through the challenges we face and the opportunities ahead, because real, lasting reform starts by listening to the people who live it. We will be focusing on three big areas: lifting productivity in a way that works for regional economies; building a skilled and supported workforce; and unlocking Tasmania's strength in clean energy and technology. Good policy must start with place. National reform must make room for local knowledge, real-world experience and plain common sense. Nationwide diversity should be a strength not a barrier. The ideas and insights from the Tasmanian roundtable will feed directly into the national conversation, and I want to thank all those who are stepping up to be part of it. This is how we do reform: carefully, collaboratively and with a focus on what actually works for people.
• Cybersafety / Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 13:40 2 min [4]
  • Queensland 13:40 () (): My comments today follow on from the vote last night calling for a review of the compulsory code of conduct for search engines, for which I thank Senator Babet. I also thank Senator Shoebridge for his contribution to the debate.
  • Australia is set to introduce unprecedented age-verification checks for search engines such as Google and for YouTube, video sites, AI and, bizarrely, maps. What started as concern for children on social media has rapidly expanded to mandatory, wide-ranging, biometric age-checking across the digital landscape. For what reason? Safety? These measures vastly exceed what's necessary to keep kids safe. Instead of waiting to see how the under-16 social-media ban goes -- if it works, if it's even possible, and how children get around it -- the censorship bureaucrats are already trying to push through further nanny-state privacy-destroying restrictions on the internet.
  • Google and Microsoft will implement age-assurance technology, under threat of a $50 million repeating fine. This verification will be used to automatically censor an unspecified range of content. Yet the experience in Britain and the EU, where almost identical legislation has come into effect, shows that the powers will be most commonly used against material that hurts people's feelings -- especially the government's feelings. This week, Britain has started removing any post which shows the current protests against excessive immigration, housing and the cost of living. The wording of the Australian code encourages the eSafety commissar to act in the same way. Did Prime Minister Anthony Albanese mention that in the last election campaign? No, he did not.
  • If democratic protests around important issues affecting safety and society cannot be spoken of, then we no longer have a democratic society. I'm disgusted. Enough is enough. We need to have an inquiry into digital regulatory overreach, including information about the actual events unfolding right now in Britain and the EU. We know how this legislation will turn out. Why are we making the same mistake other countries are making?
• South Australia: Marine Environment / Andrew McLachlan, South Australia, LP, 13:42 2 min [3]
  • South Australia 13:42 () (): The algal bloom disaster is still unfolding in South Australia. My thoughts are with the communities that have been and are being affected. I extend my thanks to my fellow senators for supporting the motion to enable the Senate to have an inquiry into the algal bloom. Special thanks to Senators Cadell and Grogan. I'm also grateful for the federal government and state government interventions.
  • Scientists are still researching the causes of the bloom. It is likely that a key factor will be ocean temperature. What we do know is that the event is unprecedented. It's timely to reflect that we are not as ready to respond to this type of disaster as we might be to a flood or a bushfire. Just because this event is taking place at sea should not exclude it from being declared a national emergency, given the scale of the bloom.
  • It is a core conservative principle that we must provide for future generations. The argument that we are free to pollute because other nations are polluting is not an argument founded in conservative thought or tradition. Also we must reflect that the sea life and habitat are already under stress from pollution and are therefore less likely to cope with unprecedented events. Governments at every level, together with communities, are going to need to work together to make our economy sustainable. We need to find ways to not pollute. From my recent reading on what it is to be a patriot in the modern world, it is to selflessly serve your nation -- not only the citizens of today but the citizens of tomorrow. And that must mean including a real commitment to care for nature.
• Albanese Government / Helen Polley, Tasmania, ALP, 13:44 2 min [3]
  • Tasmania 13:44 () (): Over the last two weeks of sittings of the 48th Parliament, the Albanese Labor government has been delivering on our election commitments. We've been delivering on what we said we would do, and we are putting that into practice. If you dive into the legislation that has been brought before the other place and this place, it displays a commitment to deliver for every Australian across all ages and demographics. We've been improving wages for Australians on the minimum wage, securing penalty rates for 2.6 million Australians, and reducing HECS and student debt for Australians by 20 per cent -- this means every Australian with HECS or a student debt, including VET and TAFE loans, will see a 20 per cent reduction over the next six months, with an average saving of $5,500. We've reduced the PBS medication scripts to $25; this is a practical cost-of-living measure that helps Australians who require essential medicine for their health.
  • We are also ensuring the safety of our children in child care. This legislation will give government the power to cut off funding to childcare centres that don't meet the national quality standard when it comes to safety and quality, where there's a breach of the law, or where centres are acting in a way that puts the safety of children at risk. No more profit before the safety and security of our children! These powers will be used in close collaboration with states and territories, regulating quality and safety under the National Quality Framework.
  • (Time expired) Today and every day, the Albanese Labor government -- that is, the people on this side of the chamber -- are focused on delivering the commitments that we made. We are delivering to our communities and to our students, we are relieving their debt, securing penalty rates and cost-of-living relief --
• Great White Sharks / Peter Whish-Wilson, Tasmania, AG, 13:46 2 min [3]
  • Tasmania 13:46 () (): Sharks are apex predators, and healthy shark populations are essential to healthy oceans, so it was with great alarm that I recently read that new genetic tests of great white shark populations, a species that is protected under state and federal laws, tell us that only 500 adult great white sharks are left around our nation. It's with significant concern that I've learned, from speaking to scientists in South Australia, that this toxic algal bloom has seen not only thousands of dead marine creatures wash up on the beach but also nearly eight adult great white sharks. The scientists tell me that is probably just the tip of the iceberg as to how many have been impacted by this toxic algal bloom.
  • Another significant source of concern is the fact that state governments like the New South Wales government and the Queensland government still refuse to remove barbaric, last-century shark nets. Shark nets are designed to catch and kill sharks and reduce shark populations, including great white sharks. They don't protect our beaches -- surfers have been killed inside shark nets by sharks -- they are simply there to protect politicians. It is good that the New South Wales government is at least moving to trial removing shark nets from selected locations, but at a time in history when our shark populations are under so much pressure, we need to do a lot better.
  • (Time expired) It might surprise knuckle-draggers like Ray Hadley at the 'Daily Terror-graph' in Sydney, that I am a surfer. I spend a lot of my time in the ocean surfing and diving. I've been out to the Neptune Islands on a scientific expedition and dived with great white sharks, and there are many surfers and ocean-lovers -- in fact most surfers and ocean-lovers -- who want to see sharks, as well as people, protected through better technology.
• Cybersafety / Ralph Babet, Victoria, UAP, 13:48 2 min [3]
  • Victoria United Australia Party Whip 13:48 ( -- ) (): The government's sudden decision to include YouTube in its social media ban for under-16s is a textbook case of panic-driven policy, not principle. It's a backflip so hard and fast it should come with a neck brace. Make no mistake, this won't just cost them the youth vote; it'll cost them votes across the board, in my opinion. YouTube is a platform for learning, creativity and free expression -- everything that the government should be supporting. By slapping a ban on YouTube for under-16s -- which is what this is -- this government is sending a clear message to young Australians: we don't trust you; we will decide what you are allowed to watch.
  • Everyone wants to protect kids online, but let's be honest: this isn't solely about protection; it's also about control. This ban triggers mandatory ID verification for all ages, and it opens the door to full-blown surveillance of every single Australian. Bureaucrats have no business micromanaging our digital lives, and parents should have the right to raise their own children and not have the government make these decisions for them.
  • This government's digital nanny state is growing by the day, but this ban is not going to make kids any safer; it is just going to make them more angry. When they are old enough to vote, they are going to remember which party treated them like chumps for daring to try and watch YouTube, of all things. This government has lost the plot, in my opinion, and it is about to lose an entire generation. But do you know what's funny? This government wants you to provide ID so that you can use YouTube, but it's not going to ask you for ID in order to vote. That's just a bit silly, right?
• Royal Flying Doctor Service / Michelle Ananda-Rajah, Victoria, ALP, 13:50 2 min [3]
  • Victoria 13:50 () (): For more than 90 years, the Royal Flying Doctor Service has been a lifeline to rural and regional communities, delivering not just emergency care but also essential primary care to communities in need. But the barriers faced by patients in regional areas are also faced by our healthcare trainees. Rural healthcare students often have to relocate for study, face financial pressure and leave their social supports behind, yet, when they do graduate, they are far more likely to return and serve in those very same communities.
  • That's why the Royal Flying Doctor Service's Give Them Wings scholarship is so important. Now in its 14th year and largely community funded, it provides $6,000 to support our future healthcare professionals, enabling them to overcome these challenges and get a taste of rural medicine. At a ceremony for scholarship recipients I recently attended, I heard from Audrey, who researched cancer outcomes in Gippsland and saw the real gap between city and country health; Sandra, who chose medicine after witnessing the vital role of her GP in her regional community; and Ruky, who, after moving from Nigeria with her two children, has decided to become a nurse and give back, inspired by the care her grandmother received.
  • These healthcare workers will go on to serve but also to inspire others, and that's the multiplier effect in action thanks to the flying doctors. Strengthening and supporting rural communities is what the flying doctors do, and this is why the Albanese Labor government has backed them in, with $75 million towards more dental, mental health and primary care, and has also committed to an additional $1 billion over the next 10 years to further support them and give them certainty. Thank you to all the staff, the dedicated healthcare workers on the ground and in training, and of course the many donors and philanthropists who back in the flying doctors.
• Calgaret, Ms Heather, Aboriginal Deaths In Custody / Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 13:52 2 min [2]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 13:52 ( -- ) (): Today I want to honour Heather Calgaret, a proud Yamatji, Noongar, Wongi and Pitjantjatjara woman who died in custody in 2021 after being found unresponsive in her cell at Victoria's Dame Phyllis Frost prison by her sister. Heather was a mother of four, a loving sister, a gifted artist and the rock of her family. This week, the coroner found that her death was entirely preventable. Heather was given the wrong medication and left without proper monitoring. Her newborn had just been taken. She was denied parole despite being eligible. Every one of these failures contributed to her death.
  • This is not new. Aboriginal women have sounded the alarm about our treatment in prison for years. We lost Veronica Nelson in a similar way. Premier Allan, of the Labor Victorian government, says she's listening to the coroner, but this week she's winding back bail reforms that were introduced after Veronica's death -- laws recommended by the coroner that we fought hard to change. This will lock up even more of our people, especially our women and children. This is shameful hypocrisy, saying the right things to one grieving family while betraying another. We need action from federal Labor. If they're serious about addressing deaths in custody, they need to take a stronger stance by withholding funding from states and territories doing harm. Without federal intervention, incarceration rates will keep rising, and so will deaths. For Heather and for every life stolen by state violence in this country, we demand action.
• Education Standards / Leah Blyth, South Australia, LP, 13:54 2 min [3]
  • South Australia Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 13:54 ( -- ) (): The recent release of the NAPLAN results highlights the continuing trend of mediocrity and declining standards in our education system. The latest results reveal that one in three students, or more than 1.5 million Australian students, are struggling to read, write and do maths. Across the country, students are continuing to underperform, with average results going backwards in many key categories. An acceptance of these declining standards doesn't just stop with our education system; it extends to all facets of life.
  • This is evident in my home state of South Australia, with recent revelations that the South Australian police have abolished literacy and numeracy testing for police academy applicants. This also extends to allowing failed applicants to reapply, not because the standards were too high but because so many applicants were failing. Now, this is not a policing issue. It's an education issue, and it's a troubling one at that. Lowering the bar may get more recruits through the door, but it signals a retreat into mediocrity. We are not tackling the root problem and we are adjusting our expectations to accommodate failure.
  • These NAPLAN results continue to highlight a worrying trend of mediocrity in our education system. Basic literacy and numeracy are not optional. They are essential. If we abandon these standards we compromise both safety and justice, particularly in our police force. We owe it to the next generation to demand better from our education system. Anything less is a disservice to our young people, to our institutions and to the communities that they will one day serve.
• Education / Deborah O'Neill, New South Wales, ALP, 13:56 2 min [6]
  • New South Wales 13:56 () (): Everyone in this chamber has lived the power of education. We see firsthand, in the states that we love and represent, education's capacity to transform lives. Education is not a privilege for a few; it's a right for all. It transforms not only the individuals who encounter and receive a wonderful education; it transforms the capacity of our entire country and, indeed, our economy.
  • Labor values have driven every education reform that we've undertaken. We've made TAFE free, we've introduced paid prac, we've made child care more affordable and more accessible, and we've made it safer, and we'll continue to attempt to do that work in the parliament -- and I hope that we will be able to pass that legislation over the course of the coming days.
  • We have reached historic agreements with our states and territories to fully fund every single school in every state. These are reforms that were long overdue, after a decade of neglect from those opposite. Indeed, I refer to the speech of the Governor-General, who, in short -- one small paragraph -- said:
  • Fourteen years since the Gonski review identified the schooling resource standard, the Commonwealth now has an agreement with all states and territories to make that standard a reality.
  • The law captures Australians into schools by compulsory attendance for 13 years of education. We are talking about an entire generation who have been ill served by the games played around education in this chamber.
  • There are critical pieces of education legislation before us this very day -- passed by the House and endorsed by the Australian people in a resounding Labor majority. Stop getting in the way of advancing the education, the health, the wellbeing and the prosperity of our nation. Pass Labor's education legislation. Let's get on with the job.
• Albanese Government, Child Care / Maria Kovacic, New South Wales, LP, 13:58 [1]
  • New South Wales 13:58 () (): I don't think we're in the way at all, Senator O'Neill. You have your supermajority, you have your ability to govern and you need to go and do it. I think it's time. You need to get ahead and do your job. You can't keep pointing to the opposition for any of the reasons that you can't do anything that you need to do. We have an example this week with the childcare legislation. You have a duty, an absolute duty to lead on this and to ensure that you get the states and territories to do what they need to do. We can't do that for you, but we will support you in that. It is a critical priority to get that right. So, while we can sit and point fingers and shout across the chamber, ultimately when you have the responsibility of leading you need to do it, and it's time to do that. So bring the people to the table to have those conversations in a manner that you should. We're here to support you to do that, but you actually have to lead on it and get the states and territories to act on that, and that will be seen. Australian families and children deserve that, particularly those families that take their children to childcare centres every day.
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Statements By Senators
  • Speaker Count: 25
  • Speakers: Mentor (ALP); Trade With The United States Of America (LP); Housing / Andrew Bragg (LP); Middle East (AG); Yoorrook Justice Commission / Jana Stewart (ALP); National Disability Insurance Scheme / Tammy Tyrrell (IND); Renewable Energy (ALP); Yoorrook Justice Commission / Lidia Thorpe (IND); Blair Electorate: Federal Election / Anthony Chisholm (ALP); Schools: Gender And Sexual Orientation / Pauline Hanson (PHON); Treasurer / Andrew Bragg (LP); Rivers (ALP); Teachers / Penny Allman-Payne (AG); Parkinson'S Disease / Wendy Askew (LP); Tasmania: Economy / Carol Brown (ALP); Cybersafety / Malcolm Roberts (PHON); South Australia: Marine Environment / Andrew McLachlan (LP); Albanese Government / Helen Polley (ALP); Great White Sharks / Peter Whish-Wilson (AG); Cybersafety / Ralph Babet (UAP); Royal Flying Doctor Service / Michelle Ananda-Rajah (ALP); Calgaret (IND); Education Standards / Leah Blyth (LP); Education / Deborah O'Neill (ALP); Albanese Government (LP)
  • Rational Thought Positives: Housing / Andrew Bragg (LP): data with source signal: "That thicket was put in place by this government. In three years, it put in place 5,000 new regulations, including 112 thousand new regulations in the Treasury and Infrastructure portfolios, where housing policy resides."; Housing / Andrew Bragg (LP): data with source signal: "Then we have perhaps the saddest stats of all to be recited in these chambers this week in Canberra, in relation to homelessness. I quote the ABC: The number of people accessing homelessness services each month has increased by 10 per cent since Labor was elected in May 2022."; Middle East (AG): quoted source material: "Now, while her team at Adrift Lab do not undertake research on algal blooms, such as we have seen recently -- and it's very concerning that we've had a number of algal blooms off Tasmania's coast, which is an increasing worry for the future -- they do study marine heatwaves and their impacts on seabirds. Fin Review One thing that struck Jen while she was reading the reporting on South Australia's algal bloom, which, I'm pleased to say, has been reported on by reporters across the country, including by those in the press gallery here -- and a shout-out to Phil Coorey for taking such a strong stance on it in the -- was my quote, where I said, 'If sea life was washing up on the beaches of Sydney, there'd be a national outcry.' She said to me: 'Sadly, Peter, this is not the case.' During the summer of 2023-24, Australia's east coast experienced one of the worst marine heatwaves ever recorded, with the Tasman Sea temperature anomaly exceeding two degrees Celsius."; Middle East (AG): data with source signal: "This has been very disappointing for Jen and her team, who, as I said earlier, have been spending mostly their own time to monitor this terrible situation and bring it to our attention. Anyway, they, along with their volunteers, have recorded data from over 212 thousand kilometres of Australia's coastline."; Middle East (AG): data with source signal: "Well, it's because only a few people have the resources and the motivation to study this. When I look at how much of our last federal budget was spent on the environment, the WWF estimated that 0.01 per cent of our federal budget is spent on the environment."; Yoorrook Justice Commission / Jana Stewart (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "But Yoorrook didn't just document the past; it designed a way forward. With a hundred recommendations across land, health, housing, education and justice, it calls for deep reform and a genuine rebalancing of power."; Cybersafety / Malcolm Roberts (PHON): source-backed reasoning: "Queensland 13:40 () (): My comments today follow on from the vote last night calling for a review of the compulsory code of conduct for search engines, for which I thank Senator Babet."; Education / Deborah O'Neill (ALP): quoted source material: "These are reforms that were long overdue, after a decade of neglect from those opposite. Indeed, I refer to the speech of the Governor-General, who, in short -- one small paragraph -- said: Fourteen years since the Gonski review identified the schooling resource standard, the Commonwealth now has an agreement with all states and territories to make that standard a reality."
  • Speaker Response Positives: Trade With The United States Of America (LP): explicit response signal: "Rabbi Coleman had a clear answer to that question, one marked by mutual respect, civic responsibility and compassion for all."; National Disability Insurance Scheme / Tammy Tyrrell (IND): responded to Middle East (AG): "That was life for a young man with autism on Tassie's east coast."; National Disability Insurance Scheme / Tammy Tyrrell (IND): responded to Middle East (AG): "It's a four-hour return trip from Launceston to Scamander, on the east coast -- $90 isn't enough to cover the costs of that travel."; Treasurer / Andrew Bragg (LP): responded to Trade With The United States Of America (LP): "Then, after the election that was conducted earlier this year, he read a book from America."; Treasurer / Andrew Bragg (LP): responded to Housing / Andrew Bragg (LP): "Interjection / Dave Sharma, New South Wales, LP Continue / Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP"; Rivers (ALP): responded to Mentor (ALP): "Lyn was an exemplary leader of our movement and a mentor to many."; Tasmania: Economy / Carol Brown (ALP): responded to Renewable Energy (ALP): "We will be focusing on three big areas: lifting productivity in a way that works for regional economies; building a skilled and supported workforce; and unlocking Tasmania's strength in clean energy and technology."; Cybersafety / Malcolm Roberts (PHON): explicit response signal: "Queensland 13:40 () (): My comments today follow on from the vote last night calling for a review of the compulsory code of conduct for search engines, for which I thank Senator Babet."; Albanese Government (LP): responded to Education / Deborah O'Neill (ALP): "New South Wales 13:58 () (): I don't think we're in the way at all, Senator O'Neill."
  • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Middle East 6 min [7]
  • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP, 14:00 3 min [1]
    • Western Australia Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 14:00 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Hamas is a terrorist organisation in exclusive control of the Gaza Strip. Hamas slaughtered 1,200 Israeli civilians in cold blood on 7 October 2023, including numerous women and children. Hamas then took hundreds of hostages, many of whom they murdered, and Hamas still hold a number of hostages in their tunnels two years later. Hamas routinely uses the people of Gaza as human shields. They use hospitals for military operations, they disrupt the flow of aid to their own population and they constantly say that their primary aim is to wipe Israel off the map. Given that the brutal terrorist organisation Hamas continues to exclusively control the Gaza Strip, will the Albanese government categorically rule out ever recognising a Palestinian state while Hamas is in control of Gaza?
  • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP, 14:03 1 min [1]
    • Western Australia Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 14:03 ( -- ) (): I ask again: will the Albanese government categorically rule out ever recognising a Palestinian state while Hamas is in control of Gaza? In particular, the former Labor frontbencher -- now a backbencher -- Ed Husic has said that he believes right now is the time to recognise a Palestinian state.
  • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP, 14:04 [1]
    • Western Australia Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 14:04 ( -- ) (): Almost every legitimate body has the goal of an enduring, negotiated and peaceful two-state solution. The fighting could end tomorrow, but so far Hamas has rejected every peace plan and opted to continue the conflict and suffering for its own purposes. Does the government acknowledge, as many Arab countries in the region now appear to have done, that the primary obstacle to peace in Gaza is not Israel but Hamas?
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:01 2 min [5]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:01 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Cash for the question -- for the opportunity to speak about recognition and also, again, to reiterate the same condemnation of Hamas that the government has issued since the horrific events of October 7. I know that Senator Cash only wants to talk about Hamas. I would say to her: I've answered your question and the questions of your colleagues since this war began about our position on Hamas. Hamas is a terrorist organisation. We condemn them. They are a listed terrorist organisation dedicated to the destruction of the State of Israel. We have a very clear position in relation to Hamas.
    • In relation to recognition, as you would know, all countries, including Arab countries, have made clear that they want to see a reformed Palestinian Authority and wish to see Hamas demilitarised. Countries have made clear that they want the security architecture in the Middle East to ensure the security of Israel. This is where the international community is, this is where the discussion is and this is where the government is engaging.
    • (Time expired) Why are we engaging on these issues? We're engaging on these issues because we know, as does the rest of the international community -- you would have seen the announcement by the United Kingdom, following the announcement also by the President of France -- that, if we want long-term peace and security in the Middle East for Israelis and Palestinians alike, we need to deal with the issue of a Palestinian state. That is the best way to ensure stability and peace for both Israelis and Palestinians. So, Senator, I would suggest to you that it might be good to grapple with that reality, because that is where the discussion of the Middle East is internationally and where countries understand --
    • Senator Cash, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:03 2 min [6]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:03 ( -- ) (): What I would say to Senator Cash is: please refer to my previous answer and the multiple answers I have given over the last years, since this conflict began. Really, people should understand in this place just how out of touch the coalition is on this. They don't even support a ceasefire, which the whole world, including President Trump, supports. You do not even support a ceasefire. That is how extreme the position of the coalition is with this person as shadow foreign minister. She does not even support a ceasefire that President Trump himself supports. That says something about the extent to which your position is divorced from the reality of what is happening on the ground, what is happening for people in the Middle East, and what is happening to the women and children of Gaza, who are --
    • Hamas.
    • (Time expired) No, they are not all Hamas, Senator. This is the problem with your position.
    • Senator Cash, second supplementary?
    • Interjection [2]
      • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:05 [4]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:05 ( -- ) (): I think the question that we are all confronted by when we see what has happened in this horrific conflict over so long is: What can we now do to make a contribution to peace and stability? What can we now do to make a contribution to the provision of aid to people who are starving as a consequence, in great part, of a deliberate decision by the Israeli government to withhold aid, which was made? We have all condemned Hamas. I consistently, as does the Prime Minister, call for hostages to be released. But I would suggest to you, Senator, that your position is out of kilter with where the international community is going. You don't even support a ceasefire, which is supported by President Trump and the whole world.
    • (Time expired) At some point, it would be good to be able to say something without her constantly talking at me. I've been pretty reasonable. I've let her go on. She is the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, but --
    • Interjection / Senator Cash interjecting --
    • Continue / Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Middle East
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Michaelia Cash (LP); Penny Wong (ALP)
    • Speaker Response Positives: Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:01 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Cash for the question -- for the opportunity to speak about recognition and also, again, to reiterate the same condemnation of Hamas that the government has issued since the horrific events of October 7."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "I know that Senator Cash only wants to talk about Hamas."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "So, Senator, I would suggest to you that it might be good to grapple with that reality, because that is where the discussion of the Middle East is internationally and where countries understand -- Senator Cash, first supplementary?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:03 ( -- ) (): What I would say to Senator Cash is: please refer to my previous answer and the multiple answers I have given over the last years, since this conflict began."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "Senator Cash, second supplementary?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "Interjection Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Continue / Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Michaelia Cash (LP): "She is the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, but -- Interjection / Senator Cash interjecting -- Continue / Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP"
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Cybersafety 5 min [7]
  • Josh Dolega, Tasmania, ALP, 14:06 3 min [1]
    • Tasmania 14:06 () (): This is not my first speech. My question is to the Minister for Youth, Senator Walsh. I refer to the Albanese Labor government's legislated social media minimum age limit and the government's ongoing commitment to delivering world-leading online safety measures. How is the government taking action to protect young Australians now and into the future from the persuasive and pervasive pull of social media and giving parents across the country peace of mind?
  • Josh Dolega, Tasmania, ALP, 14:09 1 min [1]
    • Tasmania 14:09 () (): The Albanese Labor government takes the impact and danger of online harm seriously, especially when it comes to our kids. How is the government's historic legislation to delay access to social media until the age of 16 holding big tech companies accountable and families at the heart of decision-making. What will this legislation mean for Australia's young people?
  • Josh Dolega, Tasmania, ALP, 14:10 [1]
    • Tasmania 14:10 () (): The social media minimum age rules will deliver on the Albanese Labor government's commitment to protect young Australians at a critical stage of their development. How is the government responding to expert advice from the eSafety Commissioner and providing more certainty for parents and kids on the upcoming social media minimum age restriction?
  • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 14:06 3 min [4]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 14:06 ( -- ) (): Thank you very much, Senator Dolega, for the question. We look forward to hearing your first speech, and I am pleased to get this as my first question as the Minister for Youth. As the Minister for Youth and the Minister for Early Childhood Education, I am acutely aware that the first 16 years of a person's life really matter, and I know that Senator Dolega shares that view. The Albanese Labor government is stepping up to help parents and their kids to be safer online, with world-leading laws. From 10 December, social media won't be an assumed part of life for Australian families, and Australians should be immensely proud that we are prioritising the online safety of our children and leading the world with these reforms.
    • The relationship between social media and children's mental health is one of the most important conversations of our time. Social media connects us and binds us but is also used to abuse, control and harass us. Put simply, we want our children to have another three years away from the perils of online abuse. The first 16 years of life are incredibly important for a young person's development. There is a place for social media, but there's not a place for predatory algorithms damaging the brains of our kids. Young people will have three more years to know who they are before social media assumes who they are. These years shape a young person's trajectory in so many ways, including academic, social and emotional development. They lay the foundation for future learning, health and wellbeing. We also know that positive early experiences foster healthy development while negative ones have lasting harmful effects. That's why we're delivering this important change for children and for their families.
    • Senator Dolega, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 14:09 1 min [3]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 14:09 ( -- ) (): The Albanese Labor government is on the side of families. We have faced and will continue to face pressure from major companies, but we can't be clearer: we are on the side of families in this. Delaying access to social media until the age of 16 will protect young Australians at a critical stage of their development, giving them three more years to build real-world connections and online resilience. There are heavy penalties of up to $49.5 million per breach for companies who fail to take reasonable steps to prevent underage account holders accessing their services. We want Australian parents and carers to know that the Albanese government has their backs. We are putting parents before platforms, because we know what a gift childhood is, and this gives children back their childhoods.
    • Senator Dolega, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 14:10 [1]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 14:10 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): Thank you, again, Senator Dolega, for the question. In response to advice from the eSafety Commissioner, Ms Julie Inman Grant, the online safety rules specify which types of online services will not be captured by the social media law, including messaging apps and health and education services. From December, all services that meet the definition of an age restricted social media platform in the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 and are not excluded in the rules will be subject to the social media minimum age law. This law requires social media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent Australians under 16 from having an account from 10 December 2025. The onus is strictly on social media platforms; there are no penalties for under-16s who may gain access to an age restricted platform or for parents or educators who may provide that access. Again, Australians should be immensely proud that we are prioritising the online safety of our children and leading the world.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Cybersafety
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Josh Dolega (ALP); Jess Walsh (ALP)
    • Speaker Response Positives: Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Josh Dolega (ALP): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 14:06 ( -- ) (): Thank you very much, Senator Dolega, for the question."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Josh Dolega (ALP): "As the Minister for Youth and the Minister for Early Childhood Education, I am acutely aware that the first 16 years of a person's life really matter, and I know that Senator Dolega shares that view."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Josh Dolega (ALP): "Senator Dolega, first supplementary?"; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Josh Dolega (ALP): "Senator Dolega, second supplementary?"; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Josh Dolega (ALP): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 14:10 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): Thank you, again, Senator Dolega, for the question."; Jess Walsh (ALP): explicit response signal: "In response to advice from the eSafety Commissioner, Ms Julie Inman Grant, the online safety rules specify which types of online services will not be captured by the social media law, including messaging apps and health and education services."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Medicare 9 min [7]
  • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP, 14:11 4 min [1]
    • South Australia Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 14:11 ( -- ) (): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. The Prime Minister told Australians on at least 71 occasions, 'All you need is your Medicare card, not a credit card,' and that it would be free to see a GP. Minister, does the Prime Minister stand by the promise he made to Australians at least 71 times before the election that all you will need is your Medicare card because seeing your GP will be free?
  • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP, 14:15 3 min [1]
    • South Australia Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 14:15 ( -- ) (): Minister, if the Prime Minister was indeed telling the truth, why did Australians spend more than $166 million in out-of-pocket costs at the GP in the month of May 2025? That is $166 million spent by Australians out of their own pockets while the Prime Minister was waving his Medicare around. This is according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Was the Prime Minister telling the truth?
  • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP, 14:18 [3]
    • South Australia Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 14:18 ( -- ) (): The Prime Minister told Australians on at least 71 occasions that it's 'free to see a GP' or:
    • All you need is your Medicare card, not your credit card.
    • But the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare data says that Australians paid almost $2 billion in out-of-pocket costs to see a GP in the year to May 2025. Minister, when will this $2 billion in out-of-pocket costs be reduced to $0, as promised by the Prime Minister?
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:12 3 min [12]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:12 ( -- ) (): We absolutely stand by the policy we announced in the election and the policies that we implemented previously, and we have made clear --
    • As Senator Gallagher reminds me, you actually supported them, Senator Ruston. That's how good they were. Those policies will see Australians being able to access urgent care clinics. As you know, we increased the number of those in the first term from what we promised, and now we have committed to further investment in urgent care clinics. As you know, Senator Ruston, they do provide access to bulk-billing. Yesterday I took the opportunity to remind you of the history of our investment in bulk-billing in this country. In 2023 we tripled the bulk-billing incentive for pensioners and concession card holders. When those 11 million Australians go to the GP, they are bulk-billed 90 per cent of the time.
    • Senator Ruston?
    • On direct relevance -- I was quite clear. All I asked the minister was whether the statements made by the Prime Minister which categorically state that Australians will get free access to their GP -- all Australians --
    • Senator Ruston --
    • Will they stand by that?
    • Senator Ruston, I did remind you yesterday that when you call your point of order there's no need to repeat the question. The minister is being directly relevant. Minister Wong.
    • Again I remind the senator that bulk-billing is the way in which you deliver access for Australians with their Medicare cards. That is the primary way in which governments ensure we do deliver that. As I said, in 2023 we tripled the bulk-billing incentive for pensioners and concession card holders. That means, when those 11 million Australians go to the GP, they are bulk-billed 90 per cent of the time.
    • (Time expired) Now what are we doing? We are expanding that reform, because we're extending that bulk-billing incentive to cover all 26 million Australians for the first time. We were upfront with Australians that we anticipate that, by 2030, that will enable nine out of 10 GP visits to be bulk-billed. I don't know which part of that, Senator, you don't support. Which part of that do you not support? I thought you did support this policy at the last election, or have you reverted to the position that you --
    • Senator Ruston, first supplementary?
    • Interjection [7]
      • Senator Gallagher interjecting --
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue [2]
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:15 3 min [14]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:15 ( -- ) (): This is from a member of a party that wanted to impose a GP tax. This is from a member of a party that froze indexation so that it became less, not more, affordable for Australians to see a doctor. This is from a shadow minister who used to tell people that Medicare was unsustainable and now wants to have a go at us for actually trying to get 90 per cent of Australians the capacity to see a doctor free of charge -- to be bulk-billed. This is the policy of the Ley opposition, that they actually do not want to expand bulk-billing --
    • Senator Ruston?
    • Your feigned indignation does not answer the question.
    • Senator Ruston, why are you on your feet?
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Order! Senator Gallagher?
    • We have noticed the tactic of the opposition of raising numerous points of order where they just repeat their questions. I wonder whether you could consider that in how you deal with these, because it is apparently just to repeat the questions that they have already asked.
    • Senator Ruston, I haven't called you. Thank you, Minister Gallagher. I did, indeed, remind Senator Ruston to get to the point of order and not repeat the question. In your latest attempt to stand up, Senator Ruston, you didn't even suggest it was a point of order; it was just launching into the politics of it. Across the chamber, everyone needs to think about a point of order and put it in the spirit and the way in which it is described in the standing orders. Senator Ruston.
    • On the response to the point of order on direct relevance: I would suggest to you, President, that my points of order have always been on relevance. I apologise for not saying it was raised on relevance. The minister is not going in any way to answering my question.
    • The time that you got to your feet before this time, you simply made a statement; you didn't even mention 'point of order'. The minister is being relevant, and I will ask her to continue with her response.
    • We talk about indignation. Well, I think there's a fair bit of indignation about an opposition, a coalition party, that has spent so many years trying to unpick and unravel Medicare, that froze bulk-billing and Medicare rebates for six years and that tried to introduce a GP tax, now coming in here and pretending that they care about Medicare.
    • Senator Ruston, second supplementary?
    • Interjection [10]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP
      • Senator Ruston interjecting --
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:18 [7]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:18 ( -- ) (): As I said -- an $8.5 billion investment in Medicare extending the bulk-billing incentive to cover all 26 million Australians for the very first time. Let's be clear: we have been upfront with the Australian people -- nine out of 10 visits bulk-billed by 2030 and the investment in 87 urgent care clinics plus an additional 50, all bulk-billed. This is what we do. What do they do? They want GP taxes and freezes on Medicare rebates, and this shadow minister's telling Australians, 'I'm sorry; Medicare is unsustainable.' Now you come in here and say, 'Oh!' Well your policy --
    • Minister Wong, please resume your seat. Senator Ruston.
    • On direct relevance, I've asked the minister a specific question three times today now, and she hasn't answered any of them. Could you please bring her to answering the question, unless she can't.
    • The minister is being relevant to the question. I'll ask her to continue.
    • (Time expired) It seems remarkable, doesn't it, that they don't understand that the way you deliver free access to a doctor is through bulk-billing? She thinks bulk-billing isn't relevant to visits to the doctor -- well, that says something about the lack of understanding on that side.
    • Interjection [3]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange 6 min
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Medicare
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Anne Ruston (LP); Penny Wong (ALP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Anne Ruston (LP): data with source signal: "That is $166 million spent by Australians out of their own pockets while the Prime Minister was waving his Medicare around. This is according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare."; Anne Ruston (LP): data with source signal: "South Australia Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 14:18 ( -- ) (): The Prime Minister told Australians on at least 71 occasions that it's 'free to see a GP' or: All you need is your Medicare card, not your credit card. But the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare data says that Australians paid almost $2 billion in out-of-pocket costs to see a GP in the year to May 2025."
    • Speaker Response Positives: Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:12 ( -- ) (): We absolutely stand by the policy we announced in the election and the policies that we implemented previously, and we have made clear -- As Senator Gallagher reminds me, you actually supported them, Senator Ruston."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "As you know, Senator Ruston, they do provide access to bulk-billing."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "Senator Ruston?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "This is the policy of the Ley opposition, that they actually do not want to expand bulk-billing -- Senator Ruston?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "Senator Ruston, why are you on your feet?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "Senator Ruston, I haven't called you."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Penny Wong (ALP): "They want GP taxes and freezes on Medicare rebates, and this shadow minister's telling Australians, 'I'm sorry; Medicare is unsustainable.' Now you come in here and say, 'Oh!' Well your policy -- Minister Wong, please resume your seat."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "Senator Ruston."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Anne Ruston (LP): "Interjection Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Continue / Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP"
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Environmental Conservation 6 min [7]
  • Peter Whish-Wilson, Tasmania, AG, 14:20 3 min [1]
    • Tasmania 14:20 () (): My question is to the new minister for the environment and water, Minister Watt. Studies have shown that toxic microplastics are infiltrating our lives -- our brains, blood, placentas and lungs. Some projections have oceans containing more plastic than fish by 2050. Next week, your department -- or you, potentially -- will attend the final round of negotiations in Geneva to develop a global plastics treaty to end plastics pollution. The Albanese government has claimed to be a leader in these negotiations to date, pushing for legally binding action, not simple voluntary agreements, to reduce plastic pollution in our lives. Minister, do you think Australia's credibility on the global stage is undermined by Australia currently having no legally binding laws of its own at home -- specifically, no federal bans on harmful single-use plastics, no legally binding national waste-reduction targets and no legal agreements that hold big producers and retailers responsible for the plastic that they produce and pollute with?
  • Peter Whish-Wilson, Tasmania, AG, 14:23 2 min [1]
    • Tasmania 14:23 () (): Minister, I'd be happy to go in your place, if that helps. It does stick out like a sore thumb that, while claiming to be a driving force behind the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution globally, your government has not legislated binding action on reducing plastic pollution at home. Minister, will you today take the opportunity to show the necessary leadership by committing to this chamber to legislate reform to tackle the plastic-waste crisis in this term of parliament?
  • Peter Whish-Wilson, Tasmania, AG, 14:25 [1]
    • Tasmania 14:25 () (): We will certainly look forward to some legislation on this. It has been widely reported that the Global Plastic Treaty negotiations have so far failed to achieve any binding action between nations because big business, who produce and retail plastic, have flooded the negotiations and undermined outcomes, insisting on weak voluntary agreements. Is the resistance to lobbying from big business at home in Australia also the reason that, after three years in government, you have been unable to take action on legislating to end the plastic waste crisis?
  • Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP, 14:21 3 min [8]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:21 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Whish-Wilson, who I understand is one of the two Greens spokespeople for environmental matters.
    • All 10 of us are.
    • You've got 10 -- it's Scott Morrison-esque, the number of shadow ministers for the environment in the Greens. I'm happy to meet with all of you individually!
    • I welcome the question from Senator Whish-Wilson and, in particular, his inquiry about how Australia can be taken seriously on the international stage about these matters. I can assure Senator Whish-Wilson, having recently attended the United Nations Ocean Conference in Nice, that we are internationally seen as a world leader when it comes to these matters. What was very clear at that conference was that the commitments Australia has made, in general, around ocean protection matters -- including our commitment to pass legislation to see the ratification of the high-seas biodiversity treaty -- are very much welcomed. The action that we've taken as a member of the High Ambition Coalition, when it comes to the plastics treaty that Senator Whish-Wilson is asking about, is also very much welcomed.
    • I participated in an event at that conference that included representatives of upwards of 80 countries who are members of the High Ambition Coalition for signing that plastic treaty. Senator Whish-Wilson is correct that, in the next few weeks, the treaty will be up for discussion at the relevant conference in Geneva. That is not a conference I will be attending, because I will be hard at work here in Australia, but we do take these matters about plastic pollution seriously, and I do seriously welcome the interest from Senator Whish-Wilson, who I know cares about these matters very deeply. The reality is that plastic pollution is a global problem; it's going to need global solutions. But we are, in the meantime, getting on with work domestically. I'm happy to talk more about that should there be some further questions.
    • Senator Whish-Wilson, first supplementary?
    • Interjection [2]
      • Nick McKim, Tasmania, AG
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP
  • Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP, 14:24 1 min [4]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:24 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whish-Wilson. Of course, I would expect Senator Whish-Wilson to focus on particular aspects of this issue that the government continues to work on. But I think it is worth reminding the chamber that, even in our first term of office -- under Minister Plibersek in this portfolio -- Labor delivered over $1 billion with governments and industry to boost recycling by 1.4 million tonnes per year, including $60 million for soft plastics, and created thousands of new jobs in the process. We have also been working with states and territories to reform packaging regulations with strict new rules and targets in addition to the work we have been doing on the international stage for a binding treaty.
    • I acknowledge that there is still more to be done on those matters, but we did take action in our first term to get this process underway after, yet again, it was ignored for 10 years under the coalition, and we expect to continue that work over the course of this term. I would be more than happy to speak further with Senator Whish-Wilson about our plans in this regard, and I would welcome the Greens' support to back in those efforts as well.
    • Senator Whish-Wilson, a second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP, 14:25 [1]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:25 ( -- ) (): I do have to take issue with Senator Whish-Wilson's characterisation of this, because it is not the case that this government has failed to take action on these matters. In my previous answer I went through some of the steps that we had taken in our first term to deal with the very real issue of plastic pollution, along with a range of other steps we had taken in relation to recycling in the circular economy. We recognise that there is more to do, and we will be doing more over the course of this term in partnership with the states and territories, who have a lot of responsibilities as well when it comes to these matters and waste matters in general. I am aware that, as we see at many international conferences, some countries aren't as supportive of action as Australia is and as many other nations are, but we will be working very closely with those other members of the High Ambition Coalition to get that plastics treaty done and to really take another step towards better regulation of plastics in the future.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Environmental Conservation
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Peter Whish-Wilson (AG); Murray Watt (ALP)
    • Speaker Response Positives: Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:21 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Whish-Wilson, who I understand is one of the two Greens spokespeople for environmental matters."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "I welcome the question from Senator Whish-Wilson and, in particular, his inquiry about how Australia can be taken seriously on the international stage about these matters."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "I can assure Senator Whish-Wilson, having recently attended the United Nations Ocean Conference in Nice, that we are internationally seen as a world leader when it comes to these matters."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:24 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whish-Wilson."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "Of course, I would expect Senator Whish-Wilson to focus on particular aspects of this issue that the government continues to work on."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "I would be more than happy to speak further with Senator Whish-Wilson about our plans in this regard, and I would welcome the Greens' support to back in those efforts as well."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:25 ( -- ) (): I do have to take issue with Senator Whish-Wilson's characterisation of this, because it is not the case that this government has failed to take action on these matters."; Murray Watt (ALP): explicit response signal: "In my previous answer I went through some of the steps that we had taken in our first term to deal with the very real issue of plastic pollution, along with a range of other steps we had taken in relation to recycling in the circular economy."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Economy 6 min [7]
  • Marielle Smith, South Australia, ALP, 14:26 3 min [1]
    • South Australia 14:26 () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. Today the Australian Bureau of Statistics released new figures that show that headline and underlying inflation are at their lowest rates in four years. Can the minister update the Senate on the latest economic data and tell us what progress has been made in the fight against inflation?
  • Marielle Smith, South Australia, ALP, 14:29 1 min [1]
    • South Australia 14:29 () (): The Albanese Labor government has worked hard on the global fight against inflation. Our government has continued its key focus on cost-of-living measures to help households deal with the impact of higher inflation as we also work on budget repair. Minister, how important has budget repair been in this fight against inflation?
  • Marielle Smith, South Australia, ALP, 14:30 [1]
    • South Australia 14:30 () (): What other measures has the Albanese Labor government invested in that will continue to help households this year?
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:27 2 min [5]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:27 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Marielle Smith for this really important question. We have had some very pleasing results out of the ABS, with their inflation data released this morning. It does show that both headline and underlying inflation have fallen to their lowest rates in almost four years. It also shows that headline inflation has now been in the band for a full year. Trimmed mean inflation was also down when we compared data from the June quarter to the March quarter.
    • I remind those who weren't here last term that when we came to office headline inflation had a six in front of it and was rising. It is now about a third of that. When we came to office, trimmed mean inflation was 4.9 per cent and rising. It is now almost half of that. Quarterly and monthly inflation is down, headline and underlying inflation is down, goods and services inflation is down, and tradable and non-tradable inflation is down. On all measures, we can see that substantial and welcome progress has been made in the inflation challenge that has affected all countries, particularly here. It's great to see that inflation now well and sustainably within band.
    • At the same time as we've been doing that, we've been getting real wages going again, living standards are increasing again, we've had two surpluses, we have got the debt down and interest rates have come down. But we know the job isn't done. There is more work to do -- we acknowledge that. There are structural issues in our economy and we also recognise that people remain under significant pressure, which is why we have more cost-of-living relief rolling out the door. It's one of the reasons the Treasurer will be convening the productivity roundtable for three days next month.
    • Senator Marielle Smith, a first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:29 1 min [3]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:29 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Smith for the supplementary. She is right that budget repair has been a key focus of the Treasurer's, of mine in the Finance portfolio and of the whole government over the last three years. The data out of the ABS, but also the fact that we've delivered $100 billion worth of savings since we came to government, show that the Australian Labor Party is actually the party of responsible economic management. That has been well and truly consolidated with the approach we took over the last three years, and we will continue it in the next term. We have made a number of savings right across government -- as I said, $100 billion. Ninety-four billion dollars of those savings was delivered last term, and, of course, we announced $6.4 billion worth of savings in the election campaign to be achieved over the next three years.
    • Senator Marielle Smith, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 14:30 [3]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:30 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Smith for the question. I note how silent those opposite are -- did you notice? Senator Canavan called you irrelevant; now you're almost invisible. You're irrelevant and invisible. I know those opposite are going to hate this, but, if we compare the situation when we arrived in government in 2022 with the situation now, we see employment is up, participation rates are up, the gender pay gap is down, the number of women employed full time is up, manufacturing jobs are up, industrial disputes are down, annual headline inflation is down, annual wage growth is up and annual real wages are up. That is what a Labor government delivers: responsible economic management, budget repair, dealing with inflation and making sure people can earn more and keep more of what they earn.
    • Order! I do acknowledge the quiet from the other side, and I am in charge of the chamber, so, if a minister encourages you to be noisy, please ignore them. Senator Tyrrell?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Economy
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Marielle Smith (ALP); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Katy Gallagher (ALP): data with source signal: "She is right that budget repair has been a key focus of the Treasurer's, of mine in the Finance portfolio and of the whole government over the last three years. The data out of the ABS, but also the fact that we've delivered $100 billion worth of savings since we came to government, show that the Australian Labor Party is actually the party of responsible economic management."
    • Speaker Response Positives: Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Marielle Smith (ALP): "Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:27 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Marielle Smith for this really important question."; Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Marielle Smith (ALP): "Senator Marielle Smith, a first supplementary?"; Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Marielle Smith (ALP): "Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:29 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Smith for the supplementary."; Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Marielle Smith (ALP): "Senator Marielle Smith, second supplementary?"; Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Marielle Smith (ALP): "Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 14:30 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Smith for the question."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme 3 min [7]
  • Tammy Tyrrell, Tasmania, IND, 14:32 1 min [1]
    • Tasmania Independent TAS Whip 14:32 ( -- ) (): Good advice, President, thank you. My question is for the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, Senator McCarthy. In April 2025, the Albanese government announced an increase to the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme's assistance rates over two years. For Tasmania the cost of living is the cost of shipping. What we buy comes in on ships; what we sell we ship out. But, when I chaired the 2024 select committee into the operation of the scheme, I heard that the thing Tasmanians want most urgently and need most critically is streamlining. The TFES is slow to administer, slow to deliver and overly complicated to apply -- and, for many producers, the juice ain't worth the squeeze. Tasmanian industry spent the whole federal election listening for some commitment from Labor and the coalition to modernise this bureaucratic and outdated scheme. I didn't hear one. Did I miss it?
  • Tammy Tyrrell, Tasmania, IND, 14:33 1 min [1]
    • Tasmania Independent TAS Whip 14:33 ( -- ) (): Big businesses can afford to have someone on payroll who just handles TFES applications day in, day out. For small businesses you can't do that, so most of the money paid out under the scheme currently goes to the big producers. Of Tasmania's 130-odd registered exporting businesses, five receive one-third of the TFES reimbursement. Without reform, won't your 25 per cent increase just go to the big players and not help out the little guys?
  • Tammy Tyrrell, Tasmania, IND, 14:34 [1]
    • Tasmania Independent TAS Whip 14:34 ( -- ) (): During the election, you also announced an independent review to ensure TFES is fit for purpose. Do you not already know whether it is fit for purpose? I can't understand how there is any doubt on this question. Labor was represented at the Senate select committee public hearings. Former senator Urquhart was there. You heard from witnesses and read the submissions. They told you it's not fit for purpose -- verbatim, repeatedly. What do you expect your 'independent review' will tell you?
  • Malarndirri McCarthy, Northern Territory, ALP, 14:33 1 min [3]
    • Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:33 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Tyrrell, for the question. No, you would not have missed the fact that our government has committed very strongly to Tasmania. We have delivered on our election commitment to increase assistance under the Tasmania Freight Equalisation Scheme and we are backing Tasmanian communities and businesses by boosting the TFES payment by 25 per cent for the next two years so they do get a fair go.
    • Senator Tyrrell, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Malarndirri McCarthy, Northern Territory, ALP, 14:34 1 min [3]
    • Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:34 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Tyrrell. Naturally, our election commitment to Tasmania is an important one. Clearly, if there are particular issues that you have with people coming to you, I know that the minister would like to hear from you directly in terms of those particular stakeholders. But I do say that, throughout the election campaign, we were very clear on delivering our election commitments right across Australia and, indeed, especially in Tasmania. It's wonderful to see the Tasmanian representation that we do have in our government.
    • Senator Tyrrell, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Malarndirri McCarthy, Northern Territory, ALP, 14:35 [1]
    • Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:35 ( -- ) (): Senator Tyrrell, I believe I have answered your questions in regard to our commitment to Tasmania and TFES, but I will take on board some of those points you've just raised and get back to you.
  • Single Subject Exchange 1 min
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Tammy Tyrrell (IND); Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Tammy Tyrrell (IND): source-backed reasoning: "Tasmania Independent TAS Whip 14:34 ( -- ) (): During the election, you also announced an independent review to ensure TFES is fit for purpose."; Tammy Tyrrell (IND): source-backed reasoning: "They told you it's not fit for purpose -- verbatim, repeatedly. What do you expect your 'independent review' will tell you?"
    • Speaker Response Positives: Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Tammy Tyrrell (IND): "Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:33 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Tyrrell, for the question."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Tammy Tyrrell (IND): "Senator Tyrrell, first supplementary?"; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Tammy Tyrrell (IND): "Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:34 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Tyrrell."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Tammy Tyrrell (IND): "Senator Tyrrell, second supplementary?"; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Tammy Tyrrell (IND): "Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:35 ( -- ) (): Senator Tyrrell, I believe I have answered your questions in regard to our commitment to Tasmania and TFES, but I will take on board some of those points you've just raised and get back to you."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Housing 10 min [7]
  • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP, 14:35 5 min [1]
    • New South Wales 14:35 () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. As you may recall, Minister, last week you did not know how many houses the Housing Australia Future Fund had built. My question is: do you know the number they've built as at today?
  • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP, 14:40 3 min [8]
    • New South Wales 14:40 () (): As at --
    • I'm not a member of that club, thank you.
    • Senators!
    • I withdraw.
    • Well, thank you, Senator Ayres, but I was asking for silence. Senator Bragg, I'm going to invite you to begin again, and restart the clock.
    • As at 31 March 2025, Minister, it seems that just $223 million of the required $500 million had being debited from the Housing Australia Future Fund account. Minister, was the remaining $277 million debited to spend on houses between 1 April and 30 June this year?
    • Interjection [4]
      • Senator Ayres interjecting --
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue [2]
      • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP
      • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP
  • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP, 14:43 [1]
    • New South Wales 14:43 () (): I think we'll just have one more go at this. The questions are: How many houses have been built as at today, and how much of that money was spent in the last quarter of the last financial year? It's two simple questions.
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:36 5 min [23]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:36 ( -- ) (): I'm asked about housing numbers. Can I give you a housing number, Senator? I'll give you the number of 80,000 homes that you are trying to stop being built, with the position that you have announced in the opposition to the build-to-rent regulations. I would make this point: we are getting on the job. We are delivering 55,000 social and affordable homes; 18,000 homes are in planning or construction through the HAFF and --
    • Minister, please resume your seat. Senator Bragg?
    • I'm reluctant to have to raise a point of order, but the question was very clear: how many houses has the Housing Australia Future Fund completed -- built?
    • I believe the minister is being relevant. I will listen.
    • Already 18,000 homes are in planning and construction through the Housing Australia Future Fund and the National Housing Accord. I'll give you another number, Senator: 5,000 social and affordable homes that, during the caretaker period, we asked you for support to sign contracts on, and you refused. So this opposition --
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Order! I can barely hear the minister's response.
    • So not only did the coalition delay the Housing Australia Future Fund, thereby holding up additional supply --
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Order! I am waiting for order.
    • Senator Ruston, I'm not quite sure which part of me calling for order you failed to respond to.
    • Not only did the coalition delay the Housing Australia Future Fund, thereby preventing housing construction from starting, but during the election campaign the minister wrote to the opposition asking that 5,000 homes could proceed under the caretaker conventions, and you said no. Now you have 80,000 homes --
    • Minister Wong, please resume your seat. Senator Cash?
    • It's a point of order in relation to direct relevance. The question, with all due respect, could not have been clearer: does the minister know how many homes that have been built? There is a fundamental difference between a built home and a press release.
    • I'll draw the minister back to the question.
    • As I said, I've already given the number of houses which are currently in planning or construction under the HAFF and the National Housing Accord facility. I think it is reasonable --
    • Minister, please resume your seat. Senator Bragg?
    • Point of order on relevance -- the question was: how many have been built?
    • I think the minister is being relevant to the question, Senator Bragg.
    • (Time expired) Senator Bragg, I know that you don't want to see 580 HAFF projects in Merrylands delivered, 10 in Casino and South Grafton, 144 in Maroubra, 221 in Macquarie Park and Lane Cove and --
    • Senator Bragg, first supplementary?
    • Interjection [14]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Senator Ruston interjecting --
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue [5]
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:41 2 min [14]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:41 ( -- ) (): I'm asked a question by Senator Bragg, or Braggy, as his colleagues call him -- I quite like that -- about the lack of expenditure from a fund that they wanted to abolish, that they held up and that, during the election, they refused to allow expenditure from. Just so I get that clear, Senator Bragg, you're asking for expenditure from a fund that you wanted to abolish, that you opposed and held up and that, during the election campaign --
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Order!
    • I've asked for order. Senator Cash and Senator McGrath, order!
    • Why won't you answer the question?
    • Senator McGrath, come to order!
    • I again repeat it, because it really bears some repeating, doesn't it? The coalition is asking us why there hasn't been more spent from a fund that they opposed and wanted to abolish. Their election costings abolish it. I'm not surprised you're embarrassed.
    • Senator Bragg?
    • On relevance, the question was about the financial outgoings of this scheme.
    • That's right. You asked about the scheme, and the minister is entitled to respond to your question, and the minister is being relevant.
    • (Time expired) But it is interesting, President, that they complain about the money out of the scheme being less than it should be when they actually wanted all of it abolished, they held it up and they, during the election campaign, refused to agree to 5,000 houses being commenced out of the HAFF. That's your policy.
    • Senator Bragg, second supplementary?
    • Interjection [10]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Senator Cash interjecting --
      • Senator McGrath interjecting --
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • James McGrath, Queensland, LNP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue [2]
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
  • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP, 14:43 [1]
    • South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:43 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): I've already answered the question about the number of houses that are currently in construction or being planned. What I would say to the coalition is that I think Australians understand -- including from the display today -- that there is only one party that is seeking to add to housing supply in this country, and that is the Australian Labor Party. There are parties that have always stood in the way of more houses for Australia and are continuing to stand in the way of more houses for Australians, and they are the coalition, led by, obviously, Ms Ley but also Senator Bragg, who seems to have this ideological view that governments shouldn't help to provide housing. Well, we have a different view, Senator Bragg. We have a different view; we want to build more houses for more Australians.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Housing
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Andrew Bragg (LP); Penny Wong (ALP)
    • Speaker Response Positives: Andrew Bragg (LP): explicit response signal: "Well, thank you, Senator Ayres, but I was asking for silence."; Andrew Bragg (LP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "Senator Bragg, I'm going to invite you to begin again, and restart the clock."; Andrew Bragg (LP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "Interjection Senator Ayres interjecting -- Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Continue Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "Senator Bragg?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "Senator Bragg?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "I think the minister is being relevant to the question, Senator Bragg."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "South Australia Minister for Foreign Affairs and Leader of the Government in the Senate 14:41 ( -- ) (): I'm asked a question by Senator Bragg, or Braggy, as his colleagues call him -- I quite like that -- about the lack of expenditure from a fund that they wanted to abolish, that they held up and that, during the election, they refused to allow expenditure from."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "Just so I get that clear, Senator Bragg, you're asking for expenditure from a fund that you wanted to abolish, that you opposed and held up and that, during the election campaign -- Honourable senators interjecting -- Order!"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "Senator Bragg?"; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "There are parties that have always stood in the way of more houses for Australia and are continuing to stand in the way of more houses for Australians, and they are the coalition, led by, obviously, Ms Ley but also Senator Bragg, who seems to have this ideological view that governments shouldn't help to provide housing."; Penny Wong (ALP): responded to Andrew Bragg (LP): "Well, we have a different view, Senator Bragg."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Aboriginal Deaths In Custody 5 min [7]
  • Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 14:45 2 min [1]
    • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 14:45 ( -- ) (): My question is for the Minister for Indigenous Australians. Minister, earlier this month, you acknowledged that the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody said that, to reduce deaths in custody, we must reduce incarceration rates. You said this will be achieved through the Closing the Gap agreement, but it's clear that states and territories are not even trying to reduce incarceration. This week, Victoria is passing laws that will jail more of our people. The NT government is doing the same and is even reintroducing spit hoods for 10-year-old children. What action will you take to hold states and territories accountable when they intentionally break their commitments?
  • Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 14:47 1 min [1]
    • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 14:47 ( -- ) (): The Northern Territory land councils and NAAJA are calling for federal funding constraints on the Northern Territory government. They know the Commonwealth has more tools at its disposal to drive progress. When will you acknowledge that conversations are not working and withhold funding from states who introduce laws that harm our people?
  • Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 14:48 [1]
    • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 14:48 ( -- ) (): The count has just passed 600 deaths in custody since the royal commission. We've had 17 deaths this year. It's not slowing, and incarceration rates are rising. We know the Commonwealth has powers that you've chosen not to use yet. When will you use all the powers you have to stop this? Where is your red line, Minister?
  • Malarndirri McCarthy, Northern Territory, ALP, 14:45 2 min [3]
    • Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:45 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Thorpe, for your question. Recently we held the Joint Council on Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory, and one of the first things we did there, as a joint group with First Nations ministers and the Coalition of Peaks, was to call on all governments to commit and maintain true commitment to the agreement. It is tough. Without a doubt, it is very tough. There are no actual penalties in that agreement for not agreeing to it. I remind all parliaments and cabinets across Australia that they have signed up to this. Both sides of the political spectrum have signed up to it. It is very tough, Senator Thorpe, to be able to ensure that, across the country, all of those jurisdictions adhere to that -- in particular, in the area of justice. We've seen rising numbers of Indigenous people being incarcerated, both youths and older people -- in particular, in a number of states and the Northern Territory. But I have to keep working at it, Senator Thorpe. I have to keep working with my colleagues here in the federal parliament on all sides, but especially in the cabinet.
    • Senator Thorpe, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Malarndirri McCarthy, Northern Territory, ALP, 14:47 2 min [3]
    • Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:47 ( -- ) (): That is correct, Senator Thorpe. Organisations in the Northern Territory, in particular the land councils, are calling for strict control over the funding that goes to the Northern Territory. The difficulty here, Senator Thorpe, is that nearly 80 per cent of the Northern Territory's budget comes from the Commonwealth. So we have to be responsible in our response to the Northern Territory, but we also have to be responsible to all citizens of the Northern Territory who receive that. I am looking at those numbers, and I am looking at those lengths, in terms of the federal agreements, but not just for the Northern Territory. This also has to be about the federal agreements and the communications that we have with all states.
    • Senator Thorpe, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Malarndirri McCarthy, Northern Territory, ALP, 14:49 [2]
    • Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:49 ( -- ) (): We don't want to see any death in custody or any Australian die in custody. You go into custody or into prison for a reason. Sometimes those reasons are fair, and sometimes they're unfair, but we certainly want to see people come back out if that is what they are in there to do. I think that's really important to point out.
    • In terms of what we're trying to do, I am working with the Attorney-General, who, I'm very pleased to see, is taking this on and has also met with you, Senator Thorpe, which is an important step in terms of trying to look at the issues around the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and its outstanding recommendations. We are taking your calls for oversight very seriously, and we will also be looking at this conversation more broadly with all of the attorneys-general from across the country at SCAG when they meet next month.
  • Single Subject Exchange 3 min
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Aboriginal Deaths In Custody
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Lidia Thorpe (IND); Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Lidia Thorpe (IND): data with source signal: "Victoria Independent VIC Whip 14:48 ( -- ) (): The count has just passed 600 deaths in custody since the royal commission."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "I think that's really important to point out. In terms of what we're trying to do, I am working with the Attorney-General, who, I'm very pleased to see, is taking this on and has also met with you, Senator Thorpe, which is an important step in terms of trying to look at the issues around the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and its outstanding recommendations."
    • Speaker Response Positives: Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:45 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Thorpe, for your question."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "It is very tough, Senator Thorpe, to be able to ensure that, across the country, all of those jurisdictions adhere to that -- in particular, in the area of justice."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "But I have to keep working at it, Senator Thorpe."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 14:47 ( -- ) (): That is correct, Senator Thorpe."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "The difficulty here, Senator Thorpe, is that nearly 80 per cent of the Northern Territory's budget comes from the Commonwealth."; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "Senator Thorpe, second supplementary?"; Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "In terms of what we're trying to do, I am working with the Attorney-General, who, I'm very pleased to see, is taking this on and has also met with you, Senator Thorpe, which is an important step in terms of trying to look at the issues around the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and its outstanding recommendations."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Renewable Energy 5 min [7]
  • Ellie Whiteaker, Western Australia, ALP, 14:50 2 min [1]
    • Western Australia 14:50 () (): My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water, Senator Watt. Yesterday the Minister for Climate Change and Energy announced further support for renewable energy projects, delivering on a commitment the Albanese Labor government made to the Australian people at the last election. In order to achieve our ambitious target for renewable energy generation, environmental approvals need to keep pace with this rollout. How are timely approvals from the minister's department supporting our nation's goal of achieving net zero by 2050?
  • Ellie Whiteaker, Western Australia, ALP, 14:52 2 min [1]
    • Western Australia 14:52 () (): Excellent answer -- thank you, Minister. Earlier this year, the Albanese Labor government approved the Narrogin Wind Farm, in my home state of Western Australia. Why is the rollout of renewables a good thing for the West?
  • Ellie Whiteaker, Western Australia, ALP, 14:54 [1]
    • Western Australia 14:54 () (): The Albanese Labor government is unified in its approach to investing in renewables to achieve net zero by 2050, which will ultimately protect our precious environment. How important is policy certainty around our energy market, particularly for business investment around the country?
  • Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP, 14:50 3 min [5]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:50 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whiteaker -- another terrific advocate for Western Australia joining our ranks. Yesterday the Albanese government announced that we will substantially expand the Capacity Investment Scheme by 25 per cent, and that means we will underwrite the construction of 40 gigawatts of large-scale solar, wind and storage by the end of the decade. In capacity terms, this is nearly twice as much energy infrastructure as the country's existing coal-fired power fleet. This investment is just one of a number of actions the Albanese government is taking to accelerate the rollout of renewables.
    • Another is taking action to speed up the approvals process. Yesterday, as I mentioned, I announced the speedy approval of the 90-megawatt Summerville Solar Farm, in the Richmond Valley, in the electorate held by the Nationals deputy leader, Kevin Hogan. The news was reported by the ABC under the headline, 'A solar farm approved in weeks shows how renewables rollout could be sped up'. And it's worth noting that the picture used in the article shows what the National Party says is simply not possible; it shows what must be hundreds of sheep grazing under and between thousands of solar panels, proving once again that agriculture and renewables can coexist. I know that's a hard concept to get your head around -- I know. You've just got to get out there and have a look that it's actually happening.
    • This example and other recent quick approvals of renewables projects show that, if you get the system right and everyone is working cooperatively, it is possible to get much faster approvals while also generating environmental gains through the development of cleaner energy. Unfortunately, while there are these sorts of good examples to point to, we need to see more of them. What we want to do is make sure that quicker approvals which meet strong national environmental standards actually become the norm rather than the exception. That is one of the reasons we do need to reform our environmental laws. I look forward to working constructively with all sides of this chamber over the coming months to ensure that these very important reforms can be implemented for the benefit of all Australians.
    • Senator Whiteaker, first supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP, 14:53 1 min [3]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:53 ( -- ) (): Senator Whiteaker is right. The Narrogin Wind Farm, in Western Australia's Wheatbelt, was approved by the Albanese government on 1 May, and it's expected to generate enough power for 130,000 homes. It is sad, though, to see projects like this not being supported by everyone in Western Australia. As I mentioned yesterday, over the weekend we all saw Senator Cash up to no good, backing an anti-net-zero motion at the Western Australian Liberal conference. When her party leader, Sussan Ley, is desperately trying to hold her party room together, why would the Liberal Senate leader be so publicly opposed to her own leader? News Ltd columnist James Campbell had a bit to say about this. He said, 'To some of her colleagues, the way the WA senator is behaving is reminiscent of how Nick Minchin did everything he could to make Malcolm Turnbull's life hell when he was the Liberal leader in 2009.' So, rather than the coalition Senate leader bringing good policy up, she's working to bring the coalition leader down.
    • PRESIDENT: Senator Whiteaker, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP, 14:54 [1]
    • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:54 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whiteaker. Our government's position on protecting the environment by investing in cheap and green renewable energy is clear. But what isn't clear is the coalition's position on this matter, because we've now got this incredible situation where the leader of the coalition in the House of Reps is supportive of net zero, but the leader of the coalition in the Senate is not. This week we've learned that even the coalition Senate team are deeply divided on net zero. We've seen Senator Cash and Senator Canavan on a unity ticket, fighting net zero. But, last night, Senator Sharma went where few moderates dare to go, 'Sky after dark', to say, 'We need to certainly listen to the voices in the party room, but we also need to remember that we've lost a lot of people from this room, and they're the seats we need to win.' Imagine that -- a coalition member who thinks it's actually worth listening to the millions of Australians who support net zero! Senator Sharma, it must be a very lonely place over there in that party room at the moment, because, whether it's climate, education or housing, the divisions run deep in the Liberal Party, as Senator Cash tries to tear Sussan Ley down.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Renewable Energy
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Ellie Whiteaker (ALP); Murray Watt (ALP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Murray Watt (ALP): data with source signal: "The news was reported by the ABC under the headline, 'A solar farm approved in weeks shows how renewables rollout could be sped up'. And it's worth noting that the picture used in the article shows what the National Party says is simply not possible; it shows what must be hundreds of sheep grazing under and between thousands of solar panels, proving once again that agriculture and renewables can coexist."
    • Speaker Response Positives: Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Ellie Whiteaker (ALP): "Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:50 ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whiteaker -- another terrific advocate for Western Australia joining our ranks."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Ellie Whiteaker (ALP): "Senator Whiteaker, first supplementary?"; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Ellie Whiteaker (ALP): "Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:53 ( -- ) (): Senator Whiteaker is right."; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Ellie Whiteaker (ALP): "PRESIDENT: Senator Whiteaker, second supplementary?"; Murray Watt (ALP): responded to Ellie Whiteaker (ALP): "Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 14:54 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): Thanks, Senator Whiteaker."; Murray Watt (ALP): explicit response signal: "Senator Sharma, it must be a very lonely place over there in that party room at the moment, because, whether it's climate, education or housing, the divisions run deep in the Liberal Party, as Senator Cash tries to tear Sussan Ley down."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Critical Minerals Industry 6 min [7]
  • Matthew Canavan, Queensland, NATS, 14:55 4 min [3]
    • Queensland 14:55 () (): My question is to the Minister for Industry and Innovation, Senator Ayres. Minister, the Australian Workers' Union said earlier this month:
    • Between skyrocketing energy prices, cheap dumping and tariff wars, smelters such as Nyrstar and Glencore Mt Isa are up against a wall.
    • Does the minister agree with the Australian Workers' Union that the skyrocketing energy prices which his government has presided over are risking good union jobs at Australia's manufacturing smelters?
  • Matthew Canavan, Queensland, NATS, 14:59 1 min [3]
    • Queensland 14:59 () (): Minister, reports this week suggest that the owners of the Mount Isa copper smelter and the Townsville copper refinery have told staff to brace for a pause on production and for potential job losses. The Australian Workers' Union has said:
    • Many Australian smelters face collapse without urgent intervention from state and federal governments.
    • Will the federal government heed the AWU's warning and intervene to save copper jobs in North Queensland?
  • Matthew Canavan, Queensland, NATS, 15:00 [1]
    • Queensland 15:00 () (): Minister, the Albanese government came to power promising to lower energy prices, yet now Australian unions are complaining that high energy prices are risking manufacturing jobs. Since your government was elected, electricity prices have risen 10 per cent and gas prices 45 per cent for Australian manufacturers. Will your government lower energy prices for Australian manufacturers in your second term?
  • Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP, 14:56 3 min [7]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 14:56 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Canavan. I'm very pleased, I have to say, with what Mr Farrow, as leader of the Australian Workers' Union -- his union has very strong membership and has a rich history of collective bargaining and representing that important sector, Australian manufacturing -- has had to say about the importance of that sector. And I'm really pleased with the collaborative approach that the labour movement has taken, with Mr Murphy from the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union and Mr Farrow on a unity ticket focused on the issues that matter for that sector and their members. That's a sort of lesson in working-class discipline and focus, and it wouldn't hurt --
    • I raise a point of order in relation to relevance. The quote is in relation to skyrocketing energy prices. That's what the AWU has said.
    • Thank you, Senator Cash. The minister is being relevant. Minister Ayres.
    • (Time expired) I just say that we welcome Mr Farrow's view, and I welcome the views put forward -- particularly in relation to your home state of Queensland, Senator Canavan -- by Ms MacRae, the Mayor of Mount Isa, who's been up and about here in Parliament House and on national radio and television, making the case for that important industrial community. I actually welcome people making the case for their communities in a constructive way that is focused on the facts. I've listened to Mr Farrow's view in quite some detail, as you can imagine. There are issues pressing on that sector. They are not all energy related, but some of them are energy-price related. There is a consistent stream of issues here, and I'm looking forward to the next --
    • Senator Canavan, I invite you to ask your first supplementary question.
    • Interjection [3]
      • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP
  • Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP, 14:59 2 min [3]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 14:59 (Time expired) ( -- ) (): I should start this answer by noting the fact that there are workers in Mount Isa this week who are losing their jobs this week in the mining facility. My heart goes out to them. I understand how important those jobs are. Glencore's decision in relation to its copper-mining facilities is having a real impact in that community. The smelting facility is vital in its own right, from an economic and social perspective, and Glencore is making decisions about the future of that facility in terms of its investment there and its strategic decision-making about the future of its whole asset, including its zinc assets. There is absolutely an imperative for clear action and coordination between the Commonwealth and the state governments. I welcome the approach that the Queensland government has taken, and we are working very closely with them as we advance our way through this important --
    • Senator Canavan, second supplementary?
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP, 15:01 [7]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 15:01 ( -- ) (): I am focused on the relationship between energy prices and the future of manufacturing in Australia, absolutely, but a question from Senator Canavan about energy prices really is a bit like the arsonist complaining about how fast the fire brigade arrives, like one of those teenage arsonists with the stopwatch out, worrying about performance of the rural fire service turning up to a bushfire.
    • Point of order on relevance: personal insults to the person who asked the question is not a substitute for an answer.
    • I'm sure in the spirit of a good chamber and good chamber management, Senator Ayres will (1) withdraw the comment and (2) go back to the question.
    • I withdraw it, and I broaden the observation out to what happened after a decade of mismanagement, disinvestment, policy uncertainty and an absolutely scrambled egg of energy policy mess that has left the Australian energy system and this government with an enormous amount of work to do to recover what has happened to energy and Australian manufacturing over the course of that decade.
    • N otice Paper. President, I ask that further questions be placed on the
    • Interjection [3]
      • Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Critical Minerals Industry
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Matthew Canavan (NATS); Tim Ayres (ALP)
    • Speaker Response Positives: Tim Ayres (ALP): responded to Matthew Canavan (NATS): "New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 14:56 ( -- ) (): Thank you, Senator Canavan."; Tim Ayres (ALP): explicit response signal: "Thank you, Senator Cash."; Tim Ayres (ALP): responded to Matthew Canavan (NATS): "(Time expired) I just say that we welcome Mr Farrow's view, and I welcome the views put forward -- particularly in relation to your home state of Queensland, Senator Canavan -- by Ms MacRae, the Mayor of Mount Isa, who's been up and about here in Parliament House and on national radio and television, making the case for that important industrial community."; Tim Ayres (ALP): responded to Matthew Canavan (NATS): "I welcome the approach that the Queensland government has taken, and we are working very closely with them as we advance our way through this important -- Senator Canavan, second supplementary?"; Tim Ayres (ALP): responded to Matthew Canavan (NATS): "New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 15:01 ( -- ) (): I am focused on the relationship between energy prices and the future of manufacturing in Australia, absolutely, but a question from Senator Canavan about energy prices really is a bit like the arsonist complaining about how fast the fire brigade arrives, like one of those teenage arsonists with the stopwatch out, worrying about performance of the rural fire service turning up to a bushfire."; Tim Ayres (ALP): responded to Tim Ayres (ALP): "I'm sure in the spirit of a good chamber and good chamber management, Senator Ayres will (1) withdraw the comment and (2) go back to the question."; Tim Ayres (ALP): responded to Tim Ayres (ALP): "President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Interjection Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Penny Wong, South Australia, ALP Continue / Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP"
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 15:02 ( -- ) (): I would like to answer a question by Senator Tyrrell. The independent review of the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme will seek to ensure the scheme is fit for purpose and delivers for Tasmanians into the future. Commissioning an independent review was a key recommendation of last year's Senate select committee inquiry. The review will consider the committee's further recommendations, including the Bass Strait Passenger Vehicle Equalisation Scheme and how to modernise the system to ensure it best serves Tasmanians, including reducing administrative burden for more efficient shipping. As the scheme nears the end of its fifth decade in operation, the Albanese government is commissioning this review to ensure it continues to support Tasmanian businesses into the future. TFES was introduced in 1976 by the Whitlam government.

• Answers To Questions 26 min [6]
  • Claire Chandler, Tasmania, LP, 15:03 6 min [8]
    • Tasmania 15:03 () (): I move:
    • That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.
    • As many in this place and many listening along to what happened in question time today would know, the last hour is the opportunity for senators to ask questions of the government to gather answers about what the government is doing to make lives better for everyday Australians. It's a very key accountability tool that we have in this place. Frankly, it should be an opportunity for the government to showcase leadership and how they are delivering for Australians. And, particularly given we had an election only a couple of months ago, I would have thought it was an opportunity for the government to demonstrate how it is fulfilling its election commitments. But, frankly, we heard none of that today, at least not in the responses of the government to the questions asked by the coalition.
    • Speaking of that election campaign, I think we all remember -- and we heard it mentioned in question time today -- how the Prime Minister, during that campaign, couldn't appear at any press conference without flashing his Medicare card at the cameras. It was almost like the card was surgically attached to his hand -- and I question, if that was done, whether that surgery was bulk-billed! That Medicare card became a symbol of the Prime Minister's promise to the Australian people. He claimed that under Labor all you'll need is your Medicare card, not your credit card. Senator Wong said that they're doing everything they can as a government to ensure that Australians can see the doctor for free, and the way you do that as a government is through bulk-billing. But, in reality, the facts tell a different story.
    • We've seen this week, with documents released under freedom of information laws, that the health department's own advice clearly demonstrates that nearly one in four GP clinics in this country will not bulk-bill, even under Labor's incentive scheme that Labor talked so much about during the election. We have to ask whether this government are being honest with the people of Australia when they talk about their election commitments and whether they're delivering on them, particularly when they come into this place and answer questions asked by the opposition, because the reality for most Australians is that when they visit their GP they are taking the credit card as well as handing over their Medicare card, and they're just hoping that they're going to be bulk-billed for the exercise.
    • We know that it literally has never been harder or more expensive to see a doctor in Australia than it is right now, and again this flies in the face of everything the Prime Minister said to us during the election campaign. GP bulk-billing is 11 per cent lower right now under Labor than it was when the coalition left government. That is a statistic that many in this place should reflect upon, because we do so often hear this nasty rhetoric from those on the other side that the coalition is not a friend of Medicare, that we don't want Australians to access health services. Of course we want Australians to access health services. That is why GP bulk-billing was higher under us than under this government.
    • There were 40 million fewer bulk-billed GP visits in the past year alone. This means, as I said, that more Australians, when they go to the doctor, are having to hand over their credit card as well as their Medicare card. We also know that Australians are now paying more out of their own pocket to see a GP than ever before, as the average out-of-pocket cost has reached a historic $48. That doesn't line up with what the Prime Minister told us during the election campaign, and it doesn't line up with what this government told the chamber during question time.
    • Many Australians who are doing it tough right now, and many Australians who are trying to access health services right now, who lived through an election campaign in March, April and May this year, when almost every day they saw the Prime Minister out there, shaking his Medicare card, expect more from this government, I think. It is now on the Prime Minister to ensure that the promises he made to the Australian people at the election are kept, and we in the coalition will continue to ask questions until we get some more honest answers.
  • Karen Grogan, South Australia, ALP, 15:09 5 min [5]
    • South Australia Deputy Government Whip in the Senate 15:09 ( -- ) (): I feel like I'm going around in a washing machine here. There seems to be such a common theme of what the Albanese Labor government are doing to try and overcome the decade -- the disastrous decade -- of the coalition government.
    • I love Medicare. My family loves Medicare, from the day-to-day prescriptions, the knocks and bumps, the aches and pains and the advice at the local pharmacy -- a big shout-out to John and Nam, who run my local pharmacy and are invaluable to my family -- to the more serious cuts and breaks, which our urgent care clinics are now providing an excellent service for. I've had cause to take members of my family to the urgent care clinic for both of those things, and it has been an excellent service that is fully bulk-billed. Then there are the unfortunate circumstances where people need hospital and emergency care, and again I'll tell you my family has had to use those. Nobody wants that, but it is such a relief to know that it's there, that there's someone there for you and that your Medicare card will carry through any of your health needs.
    • But that's not what we've seen from those opposite at all. Now, they can argue numbers. We can argue about which set of numbers we're looking at and what year they are from and compare which bit to which bit, but -- bottom line -- let's not forget what they did when they were in government. Let's just own exactly what you did to Medicare and to the health system in this country while you were in government. There was the introduction of, or the attempt to introduce, a GP tax. You froze indexation on Medicare rebates. I've spoken to clinics and hospitals whose doctors have gone on and on about how that just about crippled them over those, I think, seven long years. They have spoken about how crippling that freezing of indexation was to their ability to keep up. That's before we even go to the $50 million cut from public hospitals and the fact that you tried to get people to pay a fee to go to an emergency department. So I'm sorry, but it is the same old story here: almost a decade of you not actually having a care in the world for the average person out there who's trying to just get by, deal with their health conditions and make sure that they can get the care that they need when they need it.
    • So I think the way you are approaching the situation right now is quite cheeky, whereas we over here on the government benches, having been re-elected in May this year for good reason, have delivered cheaper medicines, saving well over $1 billion in out-of-pocket costs for people. We've frozen the maximum PBS co-payment for every Australian -- the largest cut to the price of PBS medicines -- and that co-payment is going to change. It's going to go up further. Sorry, it's going to go down further; our rebate is going to go up further. We've taken the co-payment from $42.50 down to $30, and then on 1 January it'll go down to $25. These are things that impact people every single day. These are cost-of-living measures that help people every single day. That's before we even get to the additional 18 million bulk-billed GP visits each year. That's what the policy is. That is what it says. This is what we are doing. This is going to make an enormous difference.
    • (Time expired) Beyond that, we've had a huge doctor crisis, a huge problem with getting access to doctors, and why is that? Again, significantly, you can look at the almost 10 years of having insufficient training for doctors and an insufficient pipeline of medical professionals coming through, and that can only be sheeted back to those opposite. What we've done is to put thousands more doctors into training programs. This year, we saw the largest ever GP training program, and that's something that we are really proud of, because we're not just here for the sugar hit. We're not just here for today. This is about building the pipeline for the future to address the crisis that was, embarrassingly, left by those opposite. We will support people, and it will be your Medicare card that you will take with you and that you can rely on for the services, supports and health care that you need.
  • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP, 15:14 5 min [5]
    • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 15:14 ( -- ) (): First, I'd like to make some remarks in relation to the position regarding the copper smelter at Mount Isa and the copper refinery in Townsville. I must say it will be absolutely heartbreaking for those communities if the copper smelter in Mount Isa and the refinery in Townsville close. I say that as someone who, decades ago, spent a lot of time in Mount Isa as a young in-house lawyer at Mount Isa Mines and acted in some really difficult cases involving some workers at Mount Isa. I got to know some of those miners. They were some of the best people I've ever met in my life -- down to earth, salt of the earth and really good people. So I really am feeling for the communities in Mount Isa and in Townsville at the moment, and I desperately hope that a way is identified to keep the smelter in Mount Isa and the refinery in Townsville open.
    • I should say, wearing my hat as shadow spokesperson for multicultural affairs, that Mount Isa is a great example of a successful multicultural community. People may not know that Mount Isa actually has a substantial Finnish community. A lot of Finnish miners came out from Finland when Mount Isa started and were part of opening up Mount Isa. Going back to the early seventies, there were workers in Mount Isa from over 50 different nationalities, who came to Mount Isa seeking a better future for themselves and their families and worked together on the project that we call Australia. It's a great example of a wonderful community, and my heart goes out to that community and to those workers. I desperately hope a pathway is identified to keep the copper smelter open and the refinery in Townsville open. As a Queensland senator, I really do hope that. I'm sure all my colleagues from Queensland and, in fact, from across the country have similar sentiments.
    • I'd like to make some comments in relation to the answers that were given to Senator Bragg's question about the Housing Australia Future Fund. Senator Wong, as she does so well, managed to avoid answering the direct question that was put to her by my colleague Senator Bragg. It was the obvious question: how many houses have been built by the Housing Australia Future Fund? You couldn't get a more simple question. We've had this $10 billion fund set up that was announced two years ago. The question was, 'How many houses has it built?' and the answer we got was quite clever but avoided answering the question. The answers provided a number of houses that were either constructed or planned -- not built; constructed or planned.
    • I'm sure there was some planning that went into the construction of that answer, but we weren't after how many houses were or are planned. We were actually after how many houses have been constructed. We received an answer in Senate estimates earlier in the year that indicated that, at that point in time, only 17 houses had been constructed two years after the Housing Australia Future Fund had been established -- not 1,700 or 17,000 but 17, one-seven, houses constructed by this $10 billion fund. Perhaps more disturbingly, we heard that the fund had acquired 20 times as many houses as it had constructed. Three hundred and forty houses had been acquired.
    • (Time expired) I don't remember it ever being the intention of the Housing Australia Future Fund to go out into the market and compete with everyday Australians to acquire houses. It was all about building future housing supply. We got no answers from the Labor government with respect to giving us an update on the number of houses constructed. Very disappointing.
  • Corinne Mulholland, Queensland, ALP, 15:19 5 min [6]
    • Queensland 15:19 () (): Imagine my surprise this afternoon to have Senator Canavan come into this place quoting the Australian Workers Union. I know I speak for myself, Senator Chisholm and other members of this chamber when I say this: welcome aboard, Senator Canavan! You are in great company. It is wonderful to have you on board quoting the Australian Workers Union. I look forward to his ongoing advocacy in this place on behalf of the entire workers union movement. Perhaps we might see him step up to the plate and back in working families. When the penalty rates legislation comes into this place, I expect to see Senator Canavan coming over here, joining his comrades, voting with us on the penalty rates legislation. I will eagerly wait to see my comrade Senator Canavan join us on this side when that legislation comes through here.
    • Let me also touch on the smelters issue raised today. The government is, of course, committed to a sustainable long-term future for our industry, while those opposite have left a graveyard of discarded energy policies in this place, with backbenchers too focused on their own politicking and their own appearances on 'Sky after dark' to hold a consistent position. I will touch on that because we saw some pretty interesting scenes in here yesterday. We saw opposition members almost bowl themselves over running out of this place to get out of this chamber and avoid taking a public position on a net zero target motion. The only person who had a bit of ticker was my comrade Senator Canavan across the chamber, a man who has not met an anti-net-zero motion that he doesn't like. There he was across the chamber, casting a lonely shadow, sitting next to his comrades from One Nation. There were people in this chamber, but they rushed out of here away from a vote. Poof! Vamoose! They were gone.
    • We saw it again this morning. They ran out of this place to avoid a vote. Their colleague Senator Henderson placed an amendment here today and, all of a sudden, when it came time to vote, they disappeared again. They disappeared again. I know I am new around here -- it's my second week on the job -- but I thought the point of showing up in this chamber was to vote and do our job, not to avoid a vote and run away from voting. Maybe I'm a bit old-fashioned, or maybe I need to learn a thing or two, but those were quite interesting scenes today, seeing them run away from a vote. They couldn't avoid it if they tried.
    • We also had our friends from the opposition talking about Medicare. The gall of these guys to come into this place and talk about Medicare -- the same people who left it in such a state after 10 years of neglect; they ran it into the ground -- and about bulk-billing rates! It had never been harder or more expensive to see a doctor than under the coalition government, and they want to come in here and lecture this government about Medicare. Bulk-billing rates were in freefall. You needed a parachute to catch them; that's how bad they were under the coalition. Unfortunately, they want to come in here and lecture us.
    • This government isn't about talk; we are about action. We promised 50 urgent care clinics and we delivered 87. We jumped over that target and then some. I've been proud as a new senator for Queensland to get out and visit some of our very well utilised urgent care clinics. I've been to see Dr Evan Jones in Morayfield in the seat of Longman, where thousands of patients were treated last year. It was a very busy urgent care clinic doing amazing things for that community. I've been up in the seat of Groom, visiting the Toowoomba urgent care clinic, which is also seeing thousands of patients. All you need is your Medicare card. You walk in the front door, and they take walk-ins seven days a week for long hours to treat people -- young kids, elderly patients and working families.
    • It's amazing to see the absolute gall of those opposite. Under this government we have seen an $8.5 billion investment in Medicare, the largest single injection in its 40-year history. We've also seen a commitment to take bulk-billing rates so that nine out of 10 visits to the GP will be bulk-billed by 2030, an amazing commitment. The record investment from this government is reducing and reversing the cuts we saw under the Liberal Party. I cannot believe the gall of those opposite.
  • Alex Antic, South Australia, LP, 15:24 [9]
    • South Australia 15:24 () (): Motions to take note of answers are normally meant to be engaging. I like to think of it like amateur stand-up, frankly. Anyway, I've got five minutes, and I could do a critique of that, but I won't.
    • Bring it on!
    • Well, it wasn't very funny. Anyway, what I am here to talk about though are the questions and the answers given to them. I listened to the debate earlier about a range of issues, including the Housing Australia Future Fund, the $10 billion fund which we know now is yet to build, I think, fewer than 17 houses -- or 17 houses; certainly not many. We're not going to house the 1.5 million new people that have entered this country over the last three-and-a-bit years with that kind of number. Fine. But we also heard a little bit about the position on fuel tax credits. We're now seeing the government unable to rule out cuts to diesel fuel rebates, which were relied on by all of the people that drive this country -- truckies, farmers, miners -- and this is all in the name of emissions.
    • The pressure on everyday Australians and everyday Australia is absolutely real, and it got me thinking about a scenario. We're always in here talking about -- and I note, by the way, that it's alright for female senators and MPs in this place to talk about the manner in which things affect female Australians, but we never hear the flip side, on what's happening to young men in this country. These are the sorts of policy positions which are putting, as I am now witnessing out in community, the most enormous strain on young Australian males that I have ever seen. If anyone's not seeing it, then they're not talking to enough young men out there. Whenever I talk to a young bloke in this country, he tells me that, no matter how much he works, no matter how hard he works and no matter how diligent he is with his savings, he simply can't afford the life that his parents did, the life that his father did, the life that his grandfather did, and the anxiety out there because of the pressure on young men is a real and present problem in this country that is not being addressed properly.
    • The young men that I speak to talk in this country about the simple things in life, like being too scared to ask a woman out, to ask a girl out, simply for a cup of coffee, because they're not sure they can afford it anymore, thanks to the policy settings we're seeing from the government across the chamber. There are a range of other issues affecting young men today. The Me Too movement has made them almost frightened to approach young women for fear of being called names, I might say. But that's a different issue; we're talking about the economic side of it. The changes to the manner in which we treat young men now, I think, are extraordinary. We hear them talking about their careers and the manner in which they feel that, even if they do a good job in their workplace, they may well get stepped over the top of because of some DEI target. We talk about them listening to commentators and politicians in this place effectively accusing them of being offenders in waiting. We find that we're now living in a world where this situation is causing angst and unrest, it is causing problems at home and it is not being addressed, and it is something that I think is going to ultimately become a serious problem. It has never, ever been more expensive for young people in this country than it is at the moment, and that is placing a huge amount of pressure on the next generation. People are reluctant now -- young men are reluctant now -- to go about the process of starting a family and owning a home. They feel they can never, ever, ever be in a position where they're going to get onto the front foot.
    • So we can talk about all of the problems facing the economy, we can talk about the gender pay gap in this place, and we can talk about the 'Gen Z boss and a mini' and all of this sort of stuff that we see floating around out here, but the question that is being left is this: what are we going to do with the generation of young men in this country who feel totally and utterly let down by the system, totally and utterly left behind by an Australia that doesn't want to talk about them in anything other than pejorative terms? For the longest time, I have been talking about this. It is often accused of being toxic in itself. But the reality is that this is a growing issue in this country. It is one that politics is not addressing, and it needs to.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Interjection / Corinne Mulholland, Queensland, ALP
    • Continue / Alex Antic, South Australia, LP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Answers To Questions
    • Speaker Count: 5
    • Speakers: Claire Chandler (LP); Karen Grogan (ALP); Paul Scarr (LP); Corinne Mulholland (ALP); Alex Antic (LP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Paul Scarr (LP): data with source signal: "We were actually after how many houses have been constructed. We received an answer in Senate estimates earlier in the year that indicated that, at that point in time, only 17 houses had been constructed two years after the Housing Australia Future Fund had been established -- not 1,700 or 17,000 but 17, one-seven, houses constructed by this $10 billion fund."
    • Speaker Response Positives: Paul Scarr (LP): explicit response signal: "I'm sure there was some planning that went into the construction of that answer, but we weren't after how many houses were or are planned."; Alex Antic (LP): responded to Corinne Mulholland (ALP): "Interjection / Corinne Mulholland, Queensland, ALP Continue / Alex Antic, South Australia, LP"
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Environmental Conservation / Peter Whish-Wilson, Tasmania, AG, 15:29 [9]
  • Tasmania 15:29 () (): I move:
  • That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for the Environment and Water (Senator Watt) to a question without notice I asked today relating to plastic pollution.
  • I've been campaigning against plastic pollution and trying to do something about this issue for nearly 20 years, including 13 years in this place. While we have always been aware that plastic is dangerous in the environment, especially in the marine environment, recent studies -- and there have been a lot of them -- talking about the human health impacts of plastic congestion, especially microplastics, are really quite chilling. This includes recent evidence that microplastics are now being linked to higher levels of cancer in young people, which is a significant area of ongoing research.
  • This is an environmental issue where it doesn't matter what your politics are, what your demographic is or where you're from; everybody wants something done about this issue. If you want any evidence of that, look at the outrage around the country when REDcycle collapsed a couple of years ago, because people wanted to do the right thing by taking their soft plastics back to the supermarket. People really care about this issue, and they want action from government.
  • Of course, it makes sense for the world to have a global plastics treaty and a high-ambition coalition of countries that will work to actively reduce plastic pollution by tackling it at its source: where it's produced, how it's produced and whether it's produced for its end of life -- that circular economy concept. But -- and I could have told you this 20 years ago -- the reason we are not getting legislative action that's binding is that the companies and businesses and the countries where these businesses are domiciled do not want to see regulatory action. They want to put the responsibility onto you, as a consumer of plastic. I've always had the view that it should be both. You should be responsible when you use plastic, but the companies that produce it should produce it for its end of life so that it can be properly recycled or reused.
  • This is where the rubber hits the road at these global plastic negotiations. Some plastics just need to be banned -- and even the industry itself recognises that -- because of the harmful chemicals they have in them. Other industries, like the recycling and waste industries, want to see problematic plastics banned. These are plastics that make it really inefficient and expensive at collection and sorting depots, from the local government level all the way through to big business. It's on us as decision-makers in places like this, in the parliaments of the world, to make the decision. That means the good old-fashioned textbook case of regulating an externality, because where a business produces a product that creates an externality, like an environmental harm, the cost of that harm should be built into the cost of the product. That's something my first-year economics students could have told you many years ago, and it's remarkable how powerful these companies have been around the world and how effective they have been at stopping any regulations.
  • I wish this global plastic treaty success next week in Geneva. It has repeatedly failed, to this point, to get an outcome because the lobbyists that turn up have outnumbered the countries and the NGOs and other organisations trying to get action on this issue. They have literally gatecrashed these negotiations and have made sure that they have failed. They have been repeatedly pushing for a weak, voluntary, non-binding agreement that allows them to basically do nothing and, in fact, to greenwash the -- I was about to say something unparliamentary there, but I won't. They are going to use this as a greenwashing opportunity, and everybody knows that. They have done it in this country for 20 or 30 years, and they are doing it everywhere around the world.
  • So the minister's department is going to go there next week and lobby for a legally binding global plastics treaty. But the problem is this: we don't have it here in Australia, so how can we be taken seriously as leaders in this space when we don't have it at home? You know what? If we get a globally binding plastics treaty, it will be a big celebration, but then we've still got to come home and do it, and all the solutions are at our fingertips. I can point you to four Senate inquiries in the last 10 years -- three of them I've chaired myself -- all with very similar recommendations. The previous government went part of the way to achieving what needs to be done. We all know what the solutions are. We've just got to get on and do it.
  • Question agreed to.

• Presentation [60]
  • Senator Ruston to move on the next day of sitting:
  • That --
  • (a) the Senate notes that on 29 July 2025 the Senate agreed that it does not consider that orders for the production of documents nos 229, 253 and 315 relating to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Financial Sustainability Framework have been satisfactorily complied with; and
  • (b) until the Senate resolves that the orders have been satisfactorily complied with, the Minister representing the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme be required to attend the Senate at the start of proceedings on the first day of each sitting week to provide an explanation of the failure to comply with the orders, and that:
  • (i) any senator may move to take note of the explanation, and
  • (ii) any such motion may be debated for no longer than 30 minutes, shall have precedence over all other business until determined, and senators may speak to the motion for not more than 5 minutes each.
  • Senators Antic and Canavan to move on the next day of sitting:
  • Sex Discrimination Act 1984 Sex Discrimination Amendment (Restoring Biological Definitions) Bill 2025 That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the , and for related purposes. .
  • Senator Gallagher to move on the next day of sitting:
  • Public Works Committee Act 1969 That
  • in accordance with the provisions of the, the following proposed works be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for consideration and report as expeditiously as is practicable:
  • Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts -- Proposed fit-out of new leased premises at 7 London Circuit, Canberra City.
  • Airservices Australia -- PFAS Remediation of the former fire training ground at Rockhampton Airport, Queensland.
  • Airservices Australia -- Aviation rescue fire fighting services NexGen project for the end-of-life facilities upgrades -- Phase 1A (Queensland and Victoria).
  • Senator McKim to move on the next day of sitting:
  • (1) That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent this resolution having effect.
  • Notice Paper (2) That the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Make Price Gouging Illegal) Bill 2024 be restored to the and consideration of the bill resume at the second reading stage.
  • Senator Hanson-Young to move on the next day of sitting:
  • (1) That the following matter be re-referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 June 2026:
  • Greenwashing, with particular reference to:
  • (a) the environmental and sustainability claims made by companies in industries including energy, vehicles, household products and appliances, food and drink packaging, cosmetics, clothing and footwear;
  • (b) the impact of misleading environmental and sustainability claims on consumers;
  • (c) domestic and international examples of regulating companies' environmental and sustainability claims;
  • (d) advertising standards in relation to environmental and sustainability claims;
  • (e) legislative options to protect consumers from greenwashing in Australia; and
  • (f) any other related matters.
  • (2) That the committee have the power to consider and use the records of the Environment and Communications References Committee appointed in the previous parliament.
  • Senator Hanson-Young to move on the next day of sitting:
  • That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 June 2026:
  • (1) That the following matters be re-referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 June 2026:
  • (a) the National Cultural Policy released on 30 January 2023; and
  • (b) any other related matters.
  • (2) That the committee have the power to consider and use the records of the Environment and Communications References Committee appointed in the previous parliament.
  • Senator Hanson-Young to move on the next day of sitting:
  • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for the Environment and Water, by no later than Wednesday, 6 August 2025, any approval conditions including draft versions provided to Woodside relating to the provisional approval of the North West Shelf extension (EPBC 2018/8335).
  • Senators Babet and Roberts to move on the next day of sitting:
  • That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 31 October 2025:
  • The Internet Search Engine Services Online Safety Code (Class 1C and Class 2 Material), with particular reference to:
  • Online Safety Act 2021 (a) the heads of authority provided by the (the Act) for each provision of the code;
  • (b) the scope and accountability of the e-Safety Commissioner in administering the Act including the development of industry codes and standards;
  • (c) ensuring there are appropriate parliamentary oversight and scrutiny mechanisms for industry codes and standards;
  • (d) the operation of similar legislation in the United Kingdom and Europe as it relates to freedom of speech and freedom of the press; and
  • (e) any other related matters.
  • Senator Barbara Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
  • That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, by no later than midday on Tuesday, 26 August 2025:
  • (a) all documents, including but not limited to correspondence, meeting notes, and briefing materials, relating to the expenditure of the $3 billion secured by the Australian Greens in negotiations for the Housing Australia Future Fund Act 2023, including the $2 billion for the Social Housing Accelerator and the $1 billion in direct spending on public and community housing funding distributed through Housing Australia; and
  • (b) a document that includes:
  • (i) for the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator, a breakdown of the 4,000 planned homes by new and pre-existing dwelling types,
  • (ii) for the $1 billion on public and community housing:
  • (A) how much has been spent and where,
  • (B) how much each state and territory has received,
  • (C) how much funding has not yet been allocated,
  • (D) the number of new and pre-existing dwellings, and
  • (E) the number of allocated, commenced, and completed dwellings, and
  • (iii) for both the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator and the $1 billion on public and community housing:
  • (A) the number of public, community, social, and other dwelling types, and
  • (B) how much of this money has been spent thus far directly on public housing.
  • Senators Cash, Payman, Babet and Hanson to move on 25 August 2025:
  • Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 Members of Parliament (Staff) Amendment (Providing Certainty and Improving Integrity) Bill 2025 That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the , and for related purposes. .
• Postponement [7]
  • Postponement
  • The Clerk: Postponement notifications have been lodged in respect of the following:
  • Business of the Senate notice of motion no. 1 for today (Senator Dean Smith), till 27 August 2025.
  • Business of the Senate notice of motion no. 2 for today (Senator Canavan), till 31 July 2025.
  • General business notice of motion no. 34 (Senator Shoebridge), till 31 July 2025.
  • General business notices of motion nos 53 to 55 (Senator Thorpe), till 31 July 2025.
  • General business notice of motion no. 58 (Senator Bragg), till 25 August 2025.

• Environment And Communications References Committee
• Northern Australia, Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• Privileges Committee
• Environment and Communications References Committee Northern Australia Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• Membership [3]
  • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 15:35 [1]
    • 15:35 (): The President has received a letter requesting changes in the membership of committees.
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 15:35 [18]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 15:35 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move:
    • That senators be discharged from and appointed to committees as follows:
    • Environment and Communications References Committee --
    • Appointed --
    • Substitute member: Senator Grogan to replace Senator Ghosh for the committee's inquiry into algal blooms in South Australia
    • Participating member: Senator Ghosh
    • Northern Australia -- Joint Standing Committee --
    • Discharged -- Senator Walker
    • Appointed -- Senator Whiteaker
    • Parliamentary Standards -- Joint Statutory Committee --
    • Appointed -- Senators Brown and Polley
    • Privileges -- Standing Committee --
    • Discharged -- Senator Sterle
    • Appointed -- Senator Sheldon
    • Can I just confirm that this doesn't deal with the controversial matter we're going to be dealing with --
    • This does not. We're saving that one up for later.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
      • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Membership
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
    • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.

• Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 15:36 1 min [1]
  • 15:36 (): I have received a letter from Senator Walsh, resigning from her place as a member of the Council of the National Library of Australia; and from the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, nominating Senator Askew to serve as a member of the council.
• Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 15:37 [6]
  • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 15:37 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move:
  • National Library Act 1960 That, in accordance with the provisions of the , the Senate elect Senator Askew to be a member of the Council of the National Library of Australia for a period of 3 years, on and from today, in place of Senator Walsh.
  • Congratulations, Senator Askew.
  • Question agreed to.
  • Congratulations, Senator Askew.
  • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Motions / Council Of The National Library Of Australia
  • Speaker Count: 2
  • Speakers: Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
  • Speaker Response Positives: Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP): "Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP"
  • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• First Reading / David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 15:38 1 min [9]
  • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 15:38 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That the following bill be introduced:
  • A Bill for an Act to amend the law relating to elections and referendums in respect of electoral communications, and for related purposes.
  • Question agreed to.
  • I present the bill and move:
  • That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
  • Question agreed to.
  • Bill read a first time.
  • Continue / David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND
• Second Reading / David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 15:39 [38]
  • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 15:39 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That this bill be now read a second time.
  • I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.
  • Leave granted.
  • Hansard I table an explanatory memorandum, and I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in .
  • Leave granted.
  • The speech read as follows --
  • Today, I introduce the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Communications) Bill 2025.
  • This bill implements recommendations of the 2023 multipartisan Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (JSCEM) to introduce truth-in-advertising legislation modelled on the existing laws in South Australia.
  • Public confidence in Australian elections is essential to preserve the legitimacy of our democratic processes.
  • Democracies around the world are increasingly facing threats that undermine public trust and promote cynical disengagement with democracy.
  • Perhaps the most concerning is from misinformation and disinformation.
  • Advancements in technology, like artificial intelligence (AI), mean it is easier than ever to create and share misinformation and disinformation.
  • While these technologies have a significant positive impact in our society, when used maliciously they have the potential to mislead voters and undermine the legitimacy of our electoral processes.
  • Australia's electoral system is strong. But it is not immune to the nefarious activities that we have seen play out in elections overseas.
  • Australia's electoral laws must evolve to maintain public trust and protect the integrity of our electoral system.
  • This bill will create new civil penalty provisions that protect against inaccurate and misleading statements being purported as fact.
  • These provisions are modelled on the framework that has worked successfully in South Australian state elections for the last 40 years.
  • The bill will also create new civil penalty provisions to address the threat of the misuse of Al in electoral processes.
  • This will apply to artificial intelligence deepfakes and voice-clones.
  • The bill introduces specific exemptions to ensure the offences are targeted and proportionate.
  • These prohibitions will not apply to expressions of opinion or regulate any private communication, satirical content, art, educational material, academic content, professional news media or anything outside of a federal election or referendum.
  • These prohibitions will apply only to campaign material already subject to regulation under the Electoral Act. These are electoral advertisements and promotional items like pamphlets, posters and how-to-vote cards.
  • Only the person ultimately responsible for the communication will be liable for any breach of these prohibitions. The prohibitions will not apply to broadcasters, publishers or those who simply share the content.
  • The bill establishes an Electoral Communications Panel to administer these new civil penalty provisions.
  • The Panel will be a secondary statutory body within the Australian Electoral Commission. This recognises and preserves the Australian Electoral Commission's neutrality and ensures the operations of the panel are fully legally independent.
  • Transparency of use of artificial intelligence (Al)
  • While a whole-of-government response to the opportunities and challenges of AI is required, the bill is a step forward in protecting our democracy from some of the most concerning risks posed by AI in elections.
  • This bill expands existing electoral authorisation requirements. Under the new requirements, certain electoral matter will need to disclose whether digital technology was used to substantially or entirely create or modify its content. This aligns with the interim report from the Senate Select Committee on Adopting AI, such as implementing a credentialing of AI generated content.
  • Subject to the passage of the bill, these amendments to authorisation requirements will be in force for the next federal election to help voters make an informed choice.
  • Media blackout period
  • This bill will remove the media blackout period that prohibits electoral or referendum matter being broadcast on television or radio in the three days before, and on, voting day.
  • Removing the blackout period will provide consistency across the media sector and responds to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters' findings.
  • Conclusion
  • The crossbench has led the government on the urgent need for truth in political advertising laws for many years. It is time for the Government to get on with legislating reforms it introduced in the 47th Parliament.
  • I seek leave to continue my remarks later.
  • Leave granted; debate adjourned.
  • Continue [2]
    • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND
    • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Bills / Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Communications) Bill 2025 (No. 2)
  • Speaker Count: 2
  • Speakers: First Reading / David Pocock (IND); Second Reading / David Pocock (IND)
  • Rational Thought Positives: Second Reading / David Pocock (IND): source-backed reasoning: "The speech read as follows -- Today, I introduce the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Communications) Bill 2025. This bill implements recommendations of the 2023 multipartisan Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (JSCEM) to introduce truth-in-advertising legislation modelled on the existing laws in South Australia."; Second Reading / David Pocock (IND): source-backed reasoning: "Under the new requirements, certain electoral matter will need to disclose whether digital technology was used to substantially or entirely create or modify its content. This aligns with the interim report from the Senate Select Committee on Adopting AI, such as implementing a credentialing of AI generated content."
  • Speaker Response Positives: Second Reading / David Pocock (IND): responded to First Reading / David Pocock (IND): "Continue David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND"
  • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Tyron Whitten, Western Australia, PHON, 15:41 4 min [4]
  • Western Australia 15:41 () (): I move:
  • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for the Environment and Water, by no later than Friday, 1 August 2025, the referral decision brief for Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation matter 2025/10161.
  • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 56, standing in the name of Senator Whitten, be agreed to.
  • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
• Division [5]
  • The Senate divided. 15:45
  • Ayes 18 [18]
    • Allman-Payne, P. J.
    • Babet, R. D.
    • Faruqi, M.
    • Hanson, P. L.
    • Hanson-Young, S. C.
    • Hodgins-May, S.
    • McKim, N. J.
    • Payman, F.
    • Pocock, B.
    • Pocock, D. W.
    • Roberts, M. I. (Teller)
    • Shoebridge, D. M.
    • Stacey, W.
    • Steele-John, J. A.
    • Tyrrell, T. M.
    • Waters, L. J.
    • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
    • Whitten, T.
  • Noes 29 [29]
    • Ananda-Rajah, M.
    • Askew, W. (Teller)
    • Ayres, T.
    • Brown, C. L.
    • Chisholm, A. D.
    • Ciccone, R.
    • Colbeck, R. M.
    • Cox, D.
    • Darmanin, L.
    • Dowling, R.
    • Farrell, D. E.
    • Gallagher, K. R.
    • Ghosh, V.
    • Green, N. L.
    • Grogan, K.
    • Lines, S.
    • McAllister, J. R.
    • McCarthy, M.
    • Mulholland, C.
    • O'Neill, D. M.
    • Polley, H.
    • Scarr, P. M.
    • Sheldon, A. V.
    • Smith, M. F.
    • Sterle, G.
    • Stewart, J. N. A.
    • Walker, C.
    • Walsh, J. C.
    • Whiteaker, E.
  • Pairs 0
  • Question negatived.

• Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee 5 min [2]
  • Appointment 5 min [4]
    • Peter Whish-Wilson, Tasmania, AG, 15:48 [38]
      • Tasmania 15:48 () (): I move:
      • (1) That a select committee
      • to be known as the Select Committee on Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy, be established to inquire into and report on:
      • (a) the prevalence of, motivations behind and impacts of misinformation and disinformation related to climate change and energy;
      • (b) how misinformation and disinformation related to climate change and energy is financed, produced and disseminated, including, but not limited to, understanding its impact on:
      • (i) Australian politics,
      • (ii) domestic and international media narratives, and
      • (iii) Australian public policy debate and outcomes;
      • (c) the origins, growth and prevalence of 'astroturfing' and its impact on public policy and debate;
      • (d) connections between Australian organisations and international think tank and influence networks associated with the dissemination of misinformation and disinformation related to matters of public policy;
      • (e) the role of social media, including the coordinated use of bots and trolls, messaging apps and generative artificial intelligence in facilitating the spread of misinformation and disinformation;
      • (f) the effectiveness of foreign agent disclosure guidelines in Australia as applied to political and policy influence organisations based outside of Australia, with particular regard to the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme;
      • (g) the efficacy of different parliamentary and regulatory approaches in combating misinformation and disinformation, what evidence exists and where further research is required, including through gathering global evidence;
      • (h) the role that could be played by media literacy education, including in the school curriculum, in combating misinformation and disinformation; and
      • (i) any other related matters.
      • (2) That the committee present its final report by Wednesday, 4 February 2026.
      • (3) That the committee consist of 6 senators, as follows:
      • (a) two nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;
      • (b) two nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate;
      • (c) one nominated by the Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate; and
      • (d) one independent senator.
      • (4) That:
      • (a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator;
      • (b) participating members may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee
      • and have all the rights of members of the committee
      • but may not vote on any questions before the committee; and
      • (c) a participating member shall be taken to be a member of a committee for the purpose of forming a quorum of the committee if a majority of members of the committee is not present.
      • (5) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that all members have not been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.
      • (6) That the committee elect as chair a member nominated by the Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate and, as deputy chair, a member nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate.
      • (7) That the deputy chair shall act as chair when the chair is absent from a meeting of the committee or the position of chair is temporarily vacant.
      • (8) That the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, may appoint another member of the committee to act as chair during the temporary absence of both the chair and deputy chair at a meeting of the committee.
      • (9) That, in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.
      • (10) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members
      • and to refer to any such subcommittee any of the matters which the committee is empowered to consider.
      • (11) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.
      • (12) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff
      • facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President.
      • (13) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in public.
    • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 15:48 5 min [5]
      • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 15:48 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move the following amendment:
      • Omit paragraph (1)(f).
      • Question agreed to.
      • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 35, standing in the name of Senator Whish-Wilson and amended by Senator Gallagher, be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Appointment
      • Speaker Count: 2
      • Speakers: Peter Whish-Wilson (AG); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
      • Rational Thought Positives: Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): source-backed reasoning: "(2) That the committee present its final report by Wednesday, 4 February 2026."; Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): source-backed reasoning: "(10) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any such subcommittee any of the matters which the committee is empowered to consider. (11) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit."
      • Speaker Response Positives: Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Peter Whish-Wilson (AG): "35, standing in the name of Senator Whish-Wilson and amended by Senator Gallagher, be agreed to."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
    • Division [5]
      • The Senate divided. 15:53
      • Ayes 39 [39]
        • Allman-Payne, P. J.
        • Ananda-Rajah, M.
        • Ayres, T.
        • Brown, C. L.
        • Chisholm, A. D.
        • Ciccone, R.
        • Cox, D.
        • Darmanin, L.
        • Dowling, R.
        • Farrell, D. E.
        • Faruqi, M.
        • Gallagher, K. R.
        • Ghosh, V.
        • Green, N. L.
        • Grogan, K.
        • Hanson-Young, S. C.
        • Hodgins-May, S.
        • Lines, S.
        • McAllister, J. R.
        • McCarthy, M.
        • McKim, N. J.
        • Mulholland, C.
        • O'Neill, D. M.
        • Payman, F.
        • Pocock, B.
        • Pocock, D. W.
        • Polley, H.
        • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
        • Shoebridge, D. M.
        • Smith, M. F.
        • Steele-John, J. A.
        • Stewart, J. N. A.
        • Thorpe, L. A.
        • Tyrrell, T. M.
        • Walker, C.
        • Walsh, J. C.
        • Waters, L. J.
        • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
        • Whiteaker, E.
      • Noes 28 [28]
        • Antic, A.
        • Askew, W. (Teller)
        • Babet, R. D.
        • Blyth, L.
        • Bragg, A. J.
        • Brockman, W. E.
        • Cadell, R. P.
        • Canavan, M. J.
        • Chandler, C.
        • Colbeck, R. M.
        • Duniam, J. R.
        • Hanson, P. L.
        • Henderson, S. M.
        • Hume, J.
        • Kovacic, M.
        • Liddle, K. J.
        • McDonald, S. E.
        • McGrath, J. A.
        • McLachlan, A. L.
        • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
        • O'Sullivan, M. A.
        • Paterson, J. W.
        • Roberts, M. I.
        • Scarr, P. M.
        • Sharma, D. N.
        • Smith, D. A.
        • Stacey, W.
        • Whitten, T.
      • Pairs 4 [8]
        • Dolega, J.
        • Ruston, A.
        • Sterle, G.
        • Collins, J.
        • Watt, M. P.
        • McKenzie, B. G.
        • Wong, P.
        • Cash, M. C.
      • Question agreed to.

• Gas Industry / Order For The Production Of Documents 4 min [3]
  • Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 15:56 3 min [19]
    • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 15:56 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Indigenous Australians, by no later than 10 am on Wednesday, 13 August 2025, all written or digital correspondence (including all attachments to any written or digital correspondence), briefing materials, text messages, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records of interaction since 1 June 2025, between:
    • (a) the Minister for Indigenous Australians (the minister) or her office and the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA);
    • (b) the minister or her office and the Northern Land Council (NLC); or
    • (c) the NIAA and the NLC;
    • in relation to Good Advice Pty Ltd, Beetaloo Energy Australia Ltd (formerly Empire Energy Group Ltd) or Top End Aboriginal Coastal Alliance Inc, including any employees, agents or representatives of these entities.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion no. 50, standing in the name of Senator Thorpe, be agreed to. Those of that opinion, say aye; against, no. I believe the noes have it?
    • The ayes have it.
    • I think I only heard one voice, Senator Thorpe.
    • Honourable senators interjecting --
    • Order! I think we all know the rules for formal motions, so, when I call, please indicate clearly what your vote is.
    • I was of the understanding that Senator Thorpe was going to amend this motion, but I didn't hear the amendment being moved, which is why we opposed it. We were to support the motion if the motion had been amended as per discussions.
    • Well, Senator Thorpe hasn't moved an amendment, the vote has been put, and a division has been called for.
    • A division having been called and the bells being rung --
    • With the indulgence of the chamber, Senator Gallagher has asked leave to cancel the bells and recommit the vote.
    • Leave granted.
    • Senator Scarr, Minister Gallagher is happy to give an explanation if you require one; otherwise, I'm going to recommit the vote.
    • If you want to, Minister.
    • Interjection [10]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Senator Gallagher interjecting --
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 15:59 [4]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 15:59 ( -- ) (): by leave -- Referring back to my previous comments about how we would support it if there was an amendment moved, my understanding is that it was amended last night. That hadn't been picked up. My apologies for that. That changes the government's position on voting on this. We will be voting in favour of the motion.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 50, standing in the name of Senator Thorpe, be agreed to.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Gas Industry / Order For The Production Of Documents
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Lidia Thorpe (IND); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
    • Speaker Response Positives: Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "50, standing in the name of Senator Thorpe, be agreed to."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Gas Industry / Order For The Production Of Documents / Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 16:00 1 min [6]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 16:00 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Indigenous Australians, by no later than 10 am on Monday, 1 September 2025, all written or digital correspondence, all attachments to any written or digital correspondence, briefing materials, text messages, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records of interaction since 1 October 2023, between the Minister for Indigenous Australians or her office, the Northern Land Council (NLC) and/or the National Indigenous Australians Agency, related to:
  • (a) the ascertainment and management of conflicts of interest of NLC councillors, directors and senior staff, including but not limited to connections to and involvement with proponents;
  • (b) the involvement of NLC councillors, directors or senior staff with the gas industry, including but not limited to Australian Energy Producers Ltd, Santos Ltd, Tamboran Resources Ltd and/or Beetaloo Energy Australia Ltd (formerly Empire Energy Group Ltd); or
  • (c) the involvement of NLC councillors, directors or senior staff with Good Advice Pty Ltd and/or the Top End Aboriginal Coastal Alliance Inc.
  • Question agreed to.
• National Climate Risk Assessment And National Adaptation Plan / Order For The Production Of Documents 6 min [7]
  • Larissa Waters, Queensland, AG, 16:01 2 min [3]
    • Queensland Leader of the Australian Greens 16:01 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That, in recognition that these documents were announced by the Government to be publicly released by 2024, there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, by 9.30 am on 25 August 2025, all completed documents and data sets that make up the Government's National Climate Risk Assessment and National Adaptation Plan.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 57, as moved by Senator Waters, be agreed to.
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 16:03
    • Ayes 40 [40]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Antic, A.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Bragg, A. J.
      • Brockman, W. E.
      • Cadell, R. P.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Chandler, C.
      • Colbeck, R. M.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Henderson, S. M.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • Hume, J.
      • Kovacic, M.
      • Liddle, K. J.
      • McGrath, J. A.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • McLachlan, A. L.
      • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
      • O'Sullivan, M. A.
      • Paterson, J. W.
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sharma, D. N.
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Thorpe, L. A.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Noes 24 [24]
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Ayres, T.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Chisholm, A. D.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Farrell, D. E.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Polley, H.
      • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Walsh, J. C.
      • Whiteaker, E.
    • Pairs 5 [10]
      • Cash, M. C.
      • Wong, P.
      • Collins, J.
      • McCarthy, M.
      • McDonald, S. E.
      • Dolega, J.
      • McKenzie, B. G.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Sterle, G.
    • Question agreed to.
  • 73
  • Lines, Sen Sue (The PRESIDENT)
  • 112096
  • Western Australia
  • ALP
• Australia'S Special Envoy To Combat Antisemitism / Order For The Production Of Documents 2 min [2]
  • Mehreen Faruqi, New South Wales, AG, 16:07 2 min [7]
    • New South Wales Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens 16:07 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to amend general business notice of motion No. 60 relating to an order for the production of documents relating to the Special Envoy's Plan to Combat Antisemitism. I understand the amendment has been circulated. It's just a change of the date when the documents are to be tabled.
    • Leave granted.
    • I amend the motion in the terms circulated in the chamber and move:
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, by no later than 9 am on 6 August 2025, all documents, reports, advice, notes and correspondence pertaining to the research referenced on page 4 of the Special Envoy's Plan to Combat Antisemitism at section 2.2.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 60 standing in the name of Senator Faruqi, as amended, be agreed to.
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Mehreen Faruqi, New South Wales, AG
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 16:09
    • Ayes 13 [13]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • McKim, N. J. (Teller)
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Thorpe, L. A.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
    • Noes 31 [31]
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Ayres, T.
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Chisholm, A. D.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Colbeck, R. M.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Farrell, D. E.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Hume, J.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Polley, H.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sheldon, A. V.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Walsh, J. C.
      • Whiteaker, E.
    • Pairs 0
    • Question negatived.

• Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee 16 min [2]
  • Membership 16 min [9]
    • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG, 16:11 [6]
      • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 16:11 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That --
      • (a) the Senate notes that:
      • (i) standing order 19(4) provides that the Standing Committee on Appropriations, Staffing and Security consists of 8 senators, including '3 other senators not being members of the government party' and that 'in the absence of agreement between the opposition and any minority groups or independent senators as to nominations, any question as to representation shall be determined by the Senate', and
      • (ii) agreement was not reached prior to the appointment of non-government senators to the committee on 22 July 2025; and
      • (b) Senators Askew, Duniam and McKenzie be discharged from the committee to enable negotiations to be held in relation to the appointment of non-government senators to the committee.
    • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP, 16:11 [5]
      • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 16:11 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move the following amendments:
      • Omit paragraph (a)(ii), substitute:
      • (ii) Senator Askew was duly appointed by the Senate because the Greens failed to lodge their committee membership letter in time;
      • (iii) Labor and the Greens have done a secret deal to add a senator from the Greens to this committee; and
      • Paragraph (b), omit "Senators Askew, Duniam and McKenzie", substitute "notwithstanding the above, Senator Askew".
    • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 16:11 1 min [5]
      • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 16:11 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
      • Leave is granted for one minute.
      • I just want to record that I think it's a deep shame that we are at the point that we are, where this is coming to the Senate for resolution. The standing orders provide for three non-government senators to be members of the appropriations committee. There had been discussions about having a Greens nomination on this committee. That was not accepted by the opposition and now we are where we are. I encourage everyone across the Senate to do what we do all the time, which is to negotiate outcomes and settle matters before they need to be brought to the Senate, as this has been and as a motion Senator Pocock will be moving later today will be. There are forms in this place where we negotiate and then we reach agreement, because it is a minority chamber. It appears to me that those opposite need to understand that that's the way it's going to work here or we will crunch you like we are crunching today.
      • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Continue / Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP
    • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG, 16:12 2 min [16]
      • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 16:12 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
      • Leave is granted for one minute.
      • The Greens will not be supporting this amendment from the opposition. We sought to resolve this matter outside the chamber and the opposition arrogantly refused. Well, now you're going to experience what happens when you aren't in control -- because you do not control this chamber. The crossbench do have a right --
      • Senator Hanson-Young, I have Senator Scarr on his feet.
      • President, on a point of order, the senator should be directing her comments through you as President, especially when she's speaking in such a hostile, aggressive manner.
      • I remind Senator Hanson-Young to make her comments to me.
      • Thank you, Madam President. It seems that the nerves are touchy on the other side. Through you, Madam President, I say to the opposition: you're hardly even an opposition at the moment. You're split; you're a rabble. At the very least, ensuring that the crossbench can have a say and a role on these types of committees is important.
      • Senator Scarr?
      • Is she finished?
      • What's your point of order?
      • Actually, I rose to seek leave to make a short statement.
      • Honourable senators interjecting --
      • Senators, order! I'm running the chamber. Senator Hanson-Young has 11 seconds remaining. Please only stand if you have a point of order.
      • Again, what they are displaying is that they are a rabble -- rabble, rabble. They're a mess. They're hardly even an opposition. They don't deserve three seats on this committee.
      • Interjection [9]
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Continue [3]
        • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG
        • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG
        • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG
    • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP, 16:14 2 min [10]
      • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 16:14 ( -- ) (): Given that Senator Hanson-Young has made a statement, I seek leave to make a very short statement.
      • Leave is granted for one minute.
      • I should advise those listening to this debate that the issue arose because my good friend Senator Askew was duly appointed by the Senate because the Greens failed to lodge their committee membership letter in time. They failed to do their homework
      • and Labor and the Greens have done a secret deal to add a senator from the Greens to this committee. But
      • notwithstanding the above, in order to progress the matter we're simply seeking that the Greens' motion, which would seek to purge my three colleagues Senator Askew, Senator Duniam and Senator McKenzie, be amended so that only Senator Askew would leave the committee. That seems a very reasonable amendment from our perspective.
      • Honourable senators interjecting --
      • Order, senators!
      • Order, Senator Colbeck! I called you to order.
      • Interjection [4]
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Senator Colbeck interjecting --
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Continue / Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
    • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 16:16 11 min [13]
      • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 16:16 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
      • Is leave granted?
      • Since we're talking about --
      • Senator Pocock, a moment, please. Leave is granted for one minute.
      • Sorry. For fear of being crunched, I --
      • No-one's going to crunch you, David!
      • In all seriousness, I just wanted to make a short statement given we're talking about the way that committees have been negotiated. I just make the point that the Greens are half the crossbench and yet, if you look at the committees and what went down the other day, the Greens are basically all of the committee members and got every single committee membership that they wanted. When the rest of the crossbench said
      • 'Hey, I'd just like to be on one committee to be able to contribute to the Senate given I'm an elected senator, ' there was a deal done between Labor and the Greens and, as we saw in the votes, that's how it rolled out. So I appreciate what they're saying on this one, but I think it has to work both ways when you want to talk about the crossbench.
      • Senator Thorpe, you are out of order. The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Scarr be agreed to. I believe the noes have it.
      • The ayes have it.
      • I only heard your voice, Senator Scarr. There need to be two voices, and you know that. With the indulgence of the Senate, I will recommit the vote. The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Scarr be agreed to.
      • Interjection [7]
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Senator Thorpe interjecting --
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Continue [3]
        • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND
        • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND
        • David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND
    • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 16:27 [1]
      • 16:27 (): The question is that general business notice of motion No. 61, standing in the name of Senator Hanson-Young, be agreed to.
    • Single Subject Exchange 8 min
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Membership
      • Speaker Count: 5
      • Speakers: Sarah Hanson-Young (AG); Paul Scarr (LP); Katy Gallagher (ALP); David Pocock (IND); Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP)
      • Speaker Response Positives: Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): responded to Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): "The crossbench do have a right -- Senator Hanson-Young, I have Senator Scarr on his feet."; Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): responded to Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): "I remind Senator Hanson-Young to make her comments to me."; Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "Senator Scarr?"; Paul Scarr (LP): responded to Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): "Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 16:14 ( -- ) (): Given that Senator Hanson-Young has made a statement, I seek leave to make a very short statement."; Paul Scarr (LP): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "Interjection Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Senator Colbeck interjecting -- Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP Continue / Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP"; David Pocock (IND): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Scarr be agreed to."; David Pocock (IND): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "I only heard your voice, Senator Scarr."; David Pocock (IND): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Scarr be agreed to."; Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP): responded to Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): "61, standing in the name of Senator Hanson-Young, be agreed to."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
    • The Senate divided. 16:22 28 AYES Antic, A. Askew, W. (Teller) Babet, R. D. Blyth, L. Bragg, A. J. Brockman, W. E. Cadell, R. P. Canavan, M. J. Chandler, C. Colbeck, R. M. Henderson, S. M. Hume, J. Kovacic, M. Liddle, K. J. McGrath, J. A. McLachlan, A. L. Nampijinpa Price, J. S. O'Sullivan, M. A. Paterson, J. W. Pocock, D. W. Roberts, M. I. Scarr, P. M. Sharma, D. N. Smith, D. A. Stacey, W. Thorpe, L. A. Tyrrell, T. M. Whitten, T. 33 NOES Allman-Payne, P. J. Ananda-Rajah, M. Ayres, T. Brown, C. L. Chisholm, A. D. Ciccone, R. Cox, D. Darmanin, L. Dowling, R. Farrell, D. E. Faruqi, M. Gallagher, K. R. Green, N. L. Grogan, K. Hanson-Young, S. C. Hodgins-May, S. Lines, S. McAllister, J. R. McKim, N. J. Mulholland, C. O'Neill, D. M. Pocock, B. Polley, H. Sheldon, A. V. (Teller) Shoebridge, D. M. Smith, M. F. Steele-John, J. A. Stewart, J. N. A. Walker, C. Walsh, J. C. Waters, L. J. Whish-Wilson, P. S. Whiteaker, E. 6 PAIRS Cash, M. C. Wong, P. Collins, J. McCarthy, M. Duniam, J. R. Dolega, J. McDonald, S. E. Ghosh, V. McKenzie, B. G. Watt, M. P. Ruston, A. Sterle, G. Question negatived. The Senate divided. 16:27 33 AYES Allman-Payne, P. J. Ananda-Rajah, M. Ayres, T. Brown, C. L. Chisholm, A. D. Ciccone, R. Cox, D. Darmanin, L. Dowling, R. Farrell, D. E. Faruqi, M. Gallagher, K. R. Green, N. L. Grogan, K. Hanson-Young, S. C. Hodgins-May, S. Lines, S. McAllister, J. R. McKim, N. J. Mulholland, C. O'Neill, D. M. Pocock, B. Polley, H. Sheldon, A. V. (Teller) Shoebridge, D. M. Smith, M. F. Steele-John, J. A. Stewart, J. N. A. Walker, C. Walsh, J. C. Waters, L. J. Whish-Wilson, P. S. Whiteaker, E. 25 NOES Antic, A. Askew, W. (Teller) Babet, R. D. Blyth, L. Bragg, A. J. Brockman, W. E. Cadell, R. P. Chandler, C. Colbeck, R. M. Henderson, S. M. Hume, J. Kovacic, M. Liddle, K. J. McGrath, J. A. McLachlan, A. L. Nampijinpa Price, J. S. O'Sullivan, M. A. Paterson, J. W. Roberts, M. I. Scarr, P. M. Sharma, D. N. Smith, D. A. Stacey, W. Tyrrell, T. M. Whitten, T. 6 PAIRS Dolega, J. Duniam, J. R. Ghosh, V. McDonald, S. E. McCarthy, M. Collins, J. Sterle, G. Ruston, A. Watt, M. P. McKenzie, B. G. Wong, P. Cash, M. C. Question agreed to.

• Victoria Independent VIC Whip 16:29 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to postpone general business notices of motion Nos 62, 63 and 64 to the next day of sitting.
• Leave granted.

• David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 16:30 1 min [2]
  • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 16:30 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That, in recognition of the allocation of private senators' time to Senator Lambie for Thursday, 31 July 2025 when she is on leave, Senator Lambie be allocated time on a later sitting day in 2025 for the consideration of a bill.
• Anthony Chisholm, Queensland, ALP, 16:31 [4]
  • Queensland Assistant Minister for Regional Development, Assistant Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Assistant Minister for Resources and Deputy Manager of Government Business in the Senate 16:31 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move that the motion be amended in the following terms:
  • After "That", insert (a)".
  • At the end of the motion add ", and
  • "(b) the consideration of private senators' bills not proceed on Thursday, 31 July 2025 and instead, a motion may be moved by Senator Thorpe and the question be put following 30 minutes of debate (5 minutes per speaker)".
• Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 16:31 [7]
  • Queensland 16:31 () (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
  • Leave is granted for one minute.
  • One Nation supports all senators, especially crossbench senators, receiving their full entitlement of time to debate in this chamber, yet this motion seeking to reorganise Senator Lambie's time tomorrow is open ended. It doesn't specify from where that future time would come in the schedule of debates already rostered to each senator. Under this motion, there is nothing to stop the government taking time off One Nation or any other senator in the future to make up for the debating spot Senator Lambie will miss tomorrow. We welcome any efforts to come to a better outcome for all, but, without that clarification or protection, One Nation will not be supporting this motion.
  • Question agreed to.
  • Original question, as amended, agreed to.
  • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Continue / Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Business / Rearrangement
  • Speaker Count: 3
  • Speakers: David Pocock (IND); Anthony Chisholm (ALP); Malcolm Roberts (PHON)
  • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.

• First Reading / Richard Colbeck, Tasmania, LP, 16:33 [9]
  • Tasmania 16:33 () (): I move:
  • That the following bill be introduced:
  • A Bill for an Act to establish a Parliamentary Joint Committee on Public Consultancy and Services Contracts, and for related purposes.
  • Question agreed to.
  • I present the bill and move:
  • That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
  • Question agreed to.
  • Bill read a first time.
  • Continue / Richard Colbeck, Tasmania, LP
• Second Reading / Richard Colbeck, Tasmania, LP, 16:33 [21]
  • Tasmania 16:33 () (): I move:
  • That this bill be now read a second time.
  • I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum related to the bill.
  • Leave granted.
  • Hansard I table an explanatory memorandum, and I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in .
  • Leave granted.
  • The speech read as follows --
  • The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Public Consultancy and Services Contracts Bill 2025 is a bill to legislate the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to review and approve consultancy and services contracts entered in to by Commonwealth entities. This bill will provide parliament with greater oversight of consultancy contract expenditure and, with it, increased transparency. It is a sound and practical piece of legislation, one which is most demonstrably required and one that speaks to the very principles of our system of governance and parliamentary control.
  • The need for this bill and the committee it establishes was overwhelmingly evident as a result of the inquiry led by the Finance and Public Administration References Committee into 'Management and assurance of integrity by consulting services'. The final report from the committee included the following recommendation:
  • Public Works Act 1969 "The committee recommends that the Parliament legislate to establish a Joint Standing Committee to review and approve consultancy and services contracts with provisions and thresholds similar to those in the but appropriately adjusted to suit the requirements of providing oversight for this significant element of government spending."
  • This bill seeks to implement that recommendation.
  • Where large sums of public funds are being expended, there is a case for wider scrutiny than is given at present. In 2022-23 the Australian Government spent $3.272 billion on management advisory contracts. This represents 4.37 per cent of the total value of procurement contracts. Such a significant outlay of public monies demands parliamentary oversight and scrutiny and offers inherent justification for the introduction of the bill. If enacted, the proposed parliamentary joint committee will consider and report to both Houses of Parliament on any public consultancy contract referred to the committee
  • to a contract that provides consideration to a value above $2 million dollars. The Committee may also inquire into any matter relating to a public consultancy contract or public consultancy contracts generally when referred to it by either House of Parliament or the Minister.
  • An area where a similar value of government expenditure occurs is that of major public works. Such expenditure is overseen by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works. The purpose of the Public Works Committee is to provide parliamentary scrutiny of government expenditure for public works. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Public Consultancy and Services Contracts bill seeks to establish a similar parliamentary body; to make certain the same level of scrutiny is applied to public consultancy contracts as with Public Works.
  • The main provisions of the bill will ensure high standards of accountability for the expenditure of public money, providing greater transparency of consultancy contracts. In the establishment of a joint standing committee to thoroughly examine and consider proposed public consultancy contracts, this bill will safeguard the maintenance of integrity and achieve value for money.
  • "Huge sums are being, and have been, spent for years past, without proper inquiries and without that information to which the House is entitled. No big public work ought to be undertaken until this House has passed judgement upon it. That is one of the prime functions of a legislative assembly anywhere and always; indeed, this proposition goes to the very root and basis of our system of responsible government and parliamentary control."
  • These words were spoken in 1913, by then Prime Minster Joseph Cook in a parliamentary debate regarding the creation of a Commonwealth Public Works Committee. One hundred and twelve years later
  • the principle being expressed in those words reflects precisely the principle within the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Public Consultancy and Services Contracts bill. This is not an adversarial bill, rather a bill that reflects our function of government. It is a straightforward and practical approach to address and correct current issues relating to engagement in consultancy contracts.
  • I seek leave to continue my remarks later.
  • Leave granted; debate adjourned.
  • Continue [2]
    • Richard Colbeck, Tasmania, LP
    • Richard Colbeck, Tasmania, LP
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Bills / Parliamentary Joint Committee On Public Consultancy And Services Contracts Bill 2025
  • Speaker Count: 2
  • Speakers: First Reading / Richard Colbeck (LP); Second Reading / Richard Colbeck (LP)
  • Rational Thought Positives: Second Reading / Richard Colbeck (LP): source-backed reasoning: "The speech read as follows -- The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Public Consultancy and Services Contracts Bill 2025 is a bill to legislate the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to review and approve consultancy and services contracts entered in to by Commonwealth entities."; Second Reading / Richard Colbeck (LP): source-backed reasoning: "The need for this bill and the committee it establishes was overwhelmingly evident as a result of the inquiry led by the Finance and Public Administration References Committee into 'Management and assurance of integrity by consulting services'. The final report from the committee included the following recommendation: Public Works Act 1969 'The committee recommends that the Parliament legislate to establish a Joint Standing Committee to review and approve consultancy and services contracts with provisions and thresholds similar to those in the but appropriately adjusted to suit the requirements of providing oversight for this significant element of government spending.' This bill seeks to implement that recommendation."
  • Speaker Response Positives: Second Reading / Richard Colbeck (LP): responded to First Reading / Richard Colbeck (LP): "Continue Richard Colbeck, Tasmania, LP Richard Colbeck, Tasmania, LP"
  • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Queensland 16:34 () (): I move:
• That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, by no later than 5 August 2025, communications and documents prepared by Deloitte for the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) related to IT systems used for administration of the Targeted Compliance Framework, including:
• (a) all versions of the statement of assurance received by DEWR to date;
• (b) all versions of the full report received by DEWR to date;
• (c) any email correspondence or letters between DEWR and Deloitte since 1 May 2025 regarding the status of the report, expected submission dates and potential publication of the statement of assurance and full report;
• (d) any email correspondence or letters between DEWR and the office of the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations (the minister) since 1 May 2025 regarding the status of the report, expected submission dates and potential publication of the statement of assurance and full report; and
• (e) a list of stakeholders consulted by DEWR, Deloitte and the minister in relation to these matters since 1 January 2024.
• Question agreed to.

• Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 16:34 ( -- ) (): by leave -- At the request of Senator Ruston, I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, she will move:
• That the Senate --
• (a) notes that the Prime Minister promised 71 times to Australians that 'all you need is your Medicare card, not a credit card' and that it would be 'free to see a GP';
• (b) notes that, despite the Prime Minister's promise, according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare:
• (i) while the Prime Minister was busy waving around his Medicare card claiming it is all you need to see a doctor, Australians have forked out almost $2 billion to see a GP in the past year,
• (ii) in May 2025 alone, during the election campaign, Australians paid a staggering $166 million in combined out-of-pocket costs, and
• (iii) Australians need their credit cards more and more, as well as their Medicare card, to see a GP under Labor;
• (c) condemns the Prime Minister for not being truthful with Australians during the Federal Election campaign; and
• (d) calls on the Prime Minister to admit that he misled Australians about Medicare.

• Slade Brockman (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP, 16:36 [6]
  • 16:36 (): Senator McKim has submitted a proposal, under standing order 75, today, which has been circulated and is shown on the Dynamic Red:
  • That the risk of mass death from starvation in Gaza, with millions of Palestinians facing catastrophic hunger, is a result of Israel's aid blockade, and that it is critical the Australian Government intensify its efforts -- including diplomatic and economic measures -- to pressure the Israeli Government to open all border crossings and allow the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid."
  • Is consideration of the proposal supported?
  • M ore than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places --
  • With the concurrence of the Senate, the clerks will set the clock in line with informal arrangements made by the whips.
  • Continue / Slade Brockman (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP
• Mehreen Faruqi, New South Wales, AG, 16:36 4 min [8]
  • New South Wales Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens 16:36 ( -- ) (): At the request of Senator McKim, I move:
  • That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
  • That the risk of mass death from starvation in Gaza, with millions of Palestinians facing catastrophic hunger, is a result of Israel's aid blockade, and that it is critical the Australian Government intensify its efforts -- including diplomatic and economic measures -- to pressure the Israeli Government to open all border crossings and allow the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid.
  • I used to say we are sliding into a dystopian future, but it is clear now that we are already living in it. Israel's mass starvation, displacement, demolition, slaughter and devastation are deliberate. It is brutal, it is inhumane, and it is savage. We warned you all, from the very beginning, that this is where we would end up. Israeli ministers themselves made it clear that this is where we would end up, but you flocked to defend Israel, knowing they have been killing, arresting, torturing and permanently injuring Palestinians for decades. Labor MPs, including members of this chamber, flocked to Israel for photo opportunities with genocidal Israeli soldiers and politicians. Our Attorney-General turned up to Israel to shake hands when he should have been issuing arrest warrants. Labor governments across the country are still working overtime to stop antigenocide protests and protesters. It has taken almost two years for Labor to wake up.
  • With this Greens motion here in front of us today, even with the amendments that Labor is going to propose, the Senate will vote to support a motion that says that Israel's aid blockade is a breach of international law and that it is critical that the Australian government continue intensifying its efforts, including diplomatic and further action, to pressure the Israeli government to open all border crossings and allow the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid. This motion today is only happening because of the pressure that people out there in the streets have put on this Labor government, week after week after week, for two years. The Greens have been very proud to bring that pressure and their voice right into parliament.
  • Today, the Senate will agree that the Albanese government needs to take more action -- not more words, not more signatures, but more action. We will not stop here. We hold the Labor government to account to actually take that action -- concrete action like putting sanctions on Israel and ending the two-way arms trade -- so we can actually stop and end the genocide. We know that Israel has sealed off Gaza's borders, choking off life-saving aid. The assistance being distributed comes through Israeli and US backchannels, and it is controlled by mercenaries who decide who lives and who dies in these death traps. This is not aid. This is control. This is occupation. This is murder. This is erasure.
  • We are facing down another Nakba. Yet there have been no red lines, no sanctions and no accountability. Israel can kill anyone it wants -- journalists, doctors, nurses, children and even aid workers like Australian Zomi Frankcom. It can destroy hospitals, universities, homes and schools, with total impunity. This is not just a crisis for the people and nations being bombed by Israel; it is a crisis of humanity and it is a crisis of conscience for us all.
  • I hope today is the day when this chamber and this parliament wakes up to the inhumanity that has been happening. We are very proud that we, and the people out there in our democracy, have brought this chamber and this parliament and this government to this place, because this was always a moral choice; this was always a moral pathway. And this is the least that we can do.
• Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP, 16:40 5 min [6]
  • Western Australia Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 16:40 ( -- ) (): The coalition will not be supporting this motion. Can I be clear, though: nobody wants to see the suffering of people in Gaza, and we are saddened and shocked, like everybody, at the loss of life in Gaza. Proper quantities of food and other aid must be provided to the people of Gaza. Israel needs to work with international organisations, and international organisations need to work with Israel, to increase the distribution of aid to those who need it. There is suffering across Gaza. An increase in the distribution of aid could alleviate this suffering.
  • The coalition have made it clear that we believe aid should freely flow into Gaza. Furthermore, it is our wish that the terrorist group Hamas surrenders and the war is ended as soon as possible. But, again, the coalition will not support this motion, because, once again, the Australian Greens are totally ignoring the role of the militant terrorist group Hamas in the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. It would be nice if, just for once, the Australian Greens would just admit that the militant terrorist group Hamas are the reason for the devastating situation in Gaza, but the Greens never seem to want to actually admit that the blame for this war lies squarely at the feet of the militant terrorist organisation Hamas.
  • The coalition, on the other hand, fundamentally believes that the moral responsibility for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is squarely on the terrorist group Hamas. The war in Gaza began because of Hamas's abhorrent attack on Israeli citizens. This was initiated through their barbaric acts on 7 October 2023. These attacks were some of the worst we have seen in recent history, making the loss of Jewish life the largest in any single day since the Holocaust, with many others then taken hostage. Those barbaric attacks, let us not conveniently forget, involved rape, torture and the murder of innocent civilians, including men, women and children, babies and the elderly. These attacks led to many innocent civilians being murdered. Others remain in captivity, 21 months later.
  • The barbaric Hamas terrorists who committed the October 7 attacks proudly filmed their crimes and posted their murderous rampages on social media. Quite frankly, there are few groups in this global world that are worse than the militant terrorist organisation of Hamas. Hamas use their own people as human shields. It is a disgrace. They hide in hospitals. It is a disgrace. They hide in schools. What cowards they are! They murder those who try and stand up to them, and they still hold 50 hostages from Israel.
  • Problems with the flow of aid are largely because of Hamas's deliberate campaign against Israel. They have repeatedly diverted and stockpiled aid in Gaza meant for civilians, but you won't see the Australian Greens talking about that. Hamas have been using this aid for their own military and political advancements. They have been filmed hijacking trucks full of aid. Their stated goal -- it is in their charter; they live by it each and every day -- is the destruction of the State of Israel.
  • One of Hamas's disgusting tactics is to use their own civilians as human shields and then blame Israel when people are attacked. They are now disrupting the flow of aid into Gaza and blame Israel when their own people face hunger and starvation. It is important that the moral outrage surrounding aid and supplies is directed at the terrorist organisation Hamas. However, both the Albanese government and the Australian Greens have deliberately been silent on the devastating effects that Hamas is having on the people of Gaza. This includes Hamas blocking aid and supplies. Remember that this war could end tomorrow. Hamas could end the suffering of the people tomorrow by freeing the Israeli hostages and laying down their arms. They choose not to.
• Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP, 16:45 5 min [7]
  • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 16:45 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move an amendment to the motion:
  • Omit all words after "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:", substitute:
  • That Israel's aid blockade, which risks mass death from starvation in Gaza and millions of Palestinians facing catastrophic hunger, is a breach of international law, and that it is critical the Australian Government continue intensifying its efforts including diplomatic and further action to pressure the Israeli Government to open all border crossings and allow the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid.
  • From the government's perspective, we do want to set out our position in relation to the resolution that's been circulated. Australians are all distressed by the ongoing violence, including the deaths of so many innocent civilians. As the Prime Minister has said, the situation in Gaza has gone beyond the world's worst fears. The position of the Australian government is very clear: every innocent life matters. We reiterate our call for an immediate and permanent ceasefire and the release of all of the remaining hostages. The government remains unequivocal in our condemnation of Hamas and its ongoing acts of terror.
  • Gaza is in the grip of a humanitarian catastrophe. Israel's denial of aid and the killing of civilians, including children, seeking access to water and food is indefensible. We call on Israel to comply immediately with its obligations under international law. This includes allowing the United Nations and non-government organisations to carry out their life-saving work safely and without hindrance. On our own, Australia has few ways to move the dial in the Middle East. That's why we have been so focused on partnering with other countries that also want to end this war to deliver life-saving aid, support a two-state solution and uphold international law. It's only by being active in the international community that we can build momentum for peace.
  • On 29 July, Australia and 14 countries released the document called the 'New York call', demanding a ceasefire in Gaza, the immediate release of hostages and unhindered humanitarian access. The joint statement reiterates Australia's commitment to a two-state solution where Israel and Palestine live side by side in peace within secure and recognised borders, consistent with international law. Australia has consistently been part of the international call on Israel to allow a full and immediate resumption of aid to Gaza in line with the binding orders of the International Court of Justice. Together with our partners, we have condemned Israel's denial of aid and the killing of civilians seeking access to water and food. The Prime Minister has said that these actions are indefensible. As he has said, it is a breach of international law to stop food being delivered, which is the decision that Israel made in March. The denial of humanitarian aid and basic services to Palestinian civilians is a violation of international law. Israel must act in accordance with international law. And Australia has been clear that Israel must comply with the binding orders of the International Court of Justice, including to ensure the unhindered provision of basic services and humanitarian assistance at scale in Gaza.
  • The call released by Australia and 14 countries on 29 July expresses grave concern over the high number of civilian casualties and the humanitarian situation in Gaza. This follows the statement released by Australia and 29 other countries on 21 July which calls on Israel to immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid and to urgently enable the UN and NGOs to do their life-saving work safely and effectively. We continue to emphasise to Israel that humanitarian aid should never be politicised. Dire UN reports about starvation of civilians, including children, underline our call. Our humanitarian partners have confirmed that they stand ready to provide immediate and life-saving assistance to the people of Gaza. We condemn the abhorrent and outrageous comments made by members of the Netanyahu government about these people in crisis.
• Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 16:50 5 min [5]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 16:50 ( -- ) (): What we are seeing in Gaza is not simply a famine. It is the result of Israel's deliberate and intentional starvation of Palestinian people. Starvation is being used as a method of mass murder and as a tactic in the ongoing ethnic cleansing, genocide and colonisation of the Palestinian people. Despite the sudden concern we are seeing from the Albanese government, the crisis didn't happen overnight. Over two long years of violence, we have witnessed horrific scenes of Israel's genocidal campaign against Palestinians -- fathers crying out as they hold what is left of their dismembered children, unborn babies removed from their deceased pregnant mothers, surgeons operating in overcrowded hospitals without anaesthetic and crushed bodies retrieved from underneath the rubble.
  • We have seen psychological warfare as Israel has forcibly displaced Palestinian families, watching as they flee their homes for their supposed safety only to be bombed in makeshift tents. Most recently, we are watching Israel's latest genocidal tactic of starvation, with skeletal children fenced like animals in a cage, holding out pots as they beg for food and aid to simply survive another day. This government pretends it is not a major player in this genocide. This is a lie. They spread misinformation about Australia's role in funding and arming Israel, pretending that the bomb bay doors they supply for F-35 jets are non-lethal in nature. These are the doors that release the bombs that slaughter innocent civilians.
  • This government contributed to the starvation of Palestinians by suspending funding to UNRWA, the primary humanitarian agency providing food, water and medical aid. This government chooses to do these things and to defend Israel's war crimes, rather than to confront the moral and legal obligations they refuse to uphold. This is not, and has never been, about Israel's so-called right to self-defence. It has been over 77 years of occupation, apartheid, dispossession and ethnic cleansing of Palestine, with one clear goal to erase Palestinians and take their land. We are now seeing a sudden panic regarding the crisis in Gaza -- that maybe the starvation of children is a bridge too far, not something that can be deflected as a matter of self-defence but genocide.
  • Despite the government and the media spending the past two years parroting Israeli propaganda to manufacture consent for genocide, we welcome the latecomers because this is a matter of Palestinian life or death. Israel continues to cross red lines; it does so with impunity. Each time this government stays silent, Israel is given the green light to carry on its genocide, knowing it can get away with it. Strongly worded emails and sharpened criticism of Israel's actions are not enough to hold Israel accountable. This government has the power to take real action and put an end to the mass murder of Palestinians.
  • The Palestinian population is on the brink of complete annihilation as this genocide enters its final iteration. We demand urgent action before it's too late. We demand nothing less than a full arms embargo, the sanctioning of Israel -- this means economic sanctions against the state of Israel, not just against individuals -- and the recognition of a Palestinian state, not as a threat against Israel but as a human right. Until then, this government is not only complicit in but also an active contributor to the genocide of Palestinians.
• Michelle Ananda-Rajah, Victoria, ALP, 16:55 [8]
  • Victoria 16:55 () (): I would be the only senator in this chamber who has actually been to Israel, boots on the ground, shortly after October 7. I went there in December 2023, along with my colleague the member for Macnamara and the then senators Birmingham and Fawcett, who have now departed this chamber. What I saw shocked me to the core. It was like nothing I have ever experienced. I have seen plenty of death as a doctor -- believe me, I have -- but this was a level of atrocity and depravity that I've never experienced before and I will never forget.
  • I went to Kfar Aza, a kibbutz on the Gaza border. I could see the plumes of smoke. I could hear the gunships going overhead and the bombs dropping. It was frightening. Kfar Aza was a burnt-out shell, with pockmarked walls and blood splattered on the walls, mattresses and furniture, and you could smell the death. I then went to a town called Sderot, which, again, is on the southern border of Israel. That town, incidentally, has the highest level of enuresis -- for those who don't know, enuresis is bedwetting -- because the children in that community are constantly under attack. There are sirens going constantly, day and night, because of missiles and rockets flying overhead from Gaza.
  • As the member for Higgins, I had a very large Jewish community. Around 612 thousand constituents identified as Jewish. The vast majority of my constituents were descendants of Holocaust survivors. Australia has the largest Holocaust survivor community outside of Israel. I have a deep connection with my then community and also with Israel. I identify as a friend of Israel. I am an ally of Israel. But, as an ally of Israel, I am not here to rubberstamp what the Netanyahu government is doing. I will not rubberstamp what the Netanyahu government is doing. It has distressed me to no end that I have seen very little effort going into crafting a political off-ramp to this devastating conflict. We have now had two years of a military campaign which has reshaped the Middle East. We've seen that ripple effect go out. But I have not seen sufficient effort by the Netanyahu government to actually craft a political solution.
  • Right now, the people of Gaza are suffering. There is a humanitarian catastrophe. There are no words left anymore in our lexicon to describe what is going on there. It is unconscionable that children should be starving. It is unconscionable that pregnant mothers cannot deliver. There is no anaesthesia or painkillers and insufficient antibiotics for the trauma and blast injuries that are being dealt with -- when I know that a few kilometres away, across the border, there are supermarkets groaning with food.
  • Right now the Netanyahu government has not articulated to the global community what the political solution to this is. This is a problem that has spanned back 100 years. It has its roots in the Balfour Declaration in 1917. That's where this conflict started. There has never been justice for the Palestinian people. Similarly, there has been an undermining, over a long period of time, of the two-state solution. Right now, we are left with a problem which has not been managed. It's been mismanaged over a long period of time. It has never actually been resolved.
  • (Time expired) What we need to do as a global community and, indeed, as a country is not divide any further but come together and support the Netanyahu government -- to nudge them in the right direction, push them in the right direction to make better choices -- because not only are they bringing Israel into disrepute and further isolation; there is an unconscionable stain on this country's history, I fear, with the deaths of so many people. It's disproportionate, and I say this as an ally of Israel. My Jewish community know who I am. They know how hard I have fought for them, and I will continue to do so, but there must be a better solution to this conflict.
  • It being 5 pm, we'll go to first speeches, and then we will return to this matter.
  • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Matters Of Urgency / Middle East
  • Speaker Count: 6
  • Speakers: Slade Brockman (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT) (LP); Mehreen Faruqi (AG); Michaelia Cash (LP); Tim Ayres (ALP); Lidia Thorpe (IND); Michelle Ananda-Rajah (ALP)
  • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.

• Dolega, Senator Josh 27 min [3]
  • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 17:00 [1]
    • 17:00 (): Pursuant to order, I now call Senator Dolega to make his first speech and ask senators that the usual courtesies be extended to him.
  • Josh Dolega, Tasmania, ALP, 17:00 [34]
    • Tasmania 17:00 () (): I would like to start off tonight by acknowledging the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people as the traditional custodians of this great land, and I pay my deepest respects to their elders past and present. I acknowledge all First Nations people and your connection to country. No matter where we are, the land always was and always will be that of First Nations people.
    • I'm humbled and honoured to have been nominated by the Labor Party to serve as a senator for Lutruwita/Tasmania. Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine that I would be here, and it's probably one of the most special things about it for me. It's a testament to the great Australian Labor Party that, no matter who you are, how much money your family has, your gender, your sexuality, your race or your ethnicity, you can become someone that represents your community in a branch, in the party room or even in this incredible place.
    • My interest in politics started when I was a young boy. My family and I would watch the nightly news. Paul Keating was Prime Minister. Seeing him debate and advocate and the way he engaged with people inspired me to look into the Australian Labor Party. You can imagine how I felt when I found out about Gough Whitlam and Bob Hawke!
    • Only one thing rivals my passion for the great Australian Labor Party and all that it has achieved for working people and Australian families over the years, and that is my love for Tasmania. I'm sure senators will agree with me here today that Tasmania is the best place on earth. We have the most beautiful land and we have the freshest air, the cleanest water, the best food and wine and the most-hearty people. I've been lucky enough to call north-west Tassie home for most of my life.
    • Wherever you go in Tasmania, the beauty and the history are like that of no other place. No other capital in our great nation is like Nipaluna/Hobart, where we have the magnificent and mighty mountain, Kunanyi, looking over it. Nowhere else can you find the beauty of Cradle Mountain and our national parks. Nowhere else is there Sheffield, the town of murals, or Stanley, the home of the Nut. We're a beautiful island state, and I encourage all Australians to come, to stay and to experience Tasmania.
    • For our democracy to be at its best, people need to have faith in those who represent them, and part of that is to know their politicians -- who we are, where we have come from and what we stand for. So here's a little bit about me. I was born in Devonport, and I grew up in a town called Spreyton on a nine-acre farm, where I was raised by my hardworking parents, Lynne and Mark, alongside my little brother, Luke. I couldn't have asked for a better life growing up.
    • My earliest memories are of my mum and dad working tremendously hard to provide for our family. We didn't have a lot of money, but what we did have was a lot of love. I remember dad coming home on a Thursday evening, and he would hand his pay packet to mum. Back in those days you had to tear off the edges to open it up and you would take out the notes and coins. This was our money to survive for the week -- food, bills, medicine and the mortgage -- and, when it was gone, it was gone. Dad reminds me that having a pizza night was a special occasion for us, like Father's Day.
    • My dad was -- or is, I should say -- a glazier. He's now mostly retired. I can only aspire to be as strong as this man. He worked and he worked, and, when I was growing up, I can honestly only remember once when he was ever sick for work. I recall being really worried about why Dad wasn't getting out of his bed for a couple of days. He just didn't ever not go to work. Even to this day, being semi-retired, he is always working and always pottering around the farm. He just never stops.
    • My mum worked two jobs and then ran our house. She kept our house organised, our stomachs full and our lunch boxes packed. She worked early hours in the morning for Tassie's local bakery, delivering bread all around the local area just in time for the shops to open. Mum would then do cleaning for her friend, who ran a couple of local cottages for accommodation. As you may be able to tell, I idolise my parents. They have given me everything, from a loving home to grow up in to every support possible. Still, to this day, they help me wherever they can. My mum loves to cook dinner for me and my partner all the time. My dad is my handyman, who still sets up things like my washing machine and does everything to do with tools that I haven't yet worked out how to use.
    • Twenty years ago, my mum was diagnosed with chronic kidney disease. I remember Mum being extremely sick for many days. She just kept getting worse, and a doctor told her to take Panadol. I became incredibly scared for her wellbeing and I actually phoned her doctor and demanded they see her. The next day, she was in ICU. Her kidneys were in real trouble, and Mum was very sick. I remember getting a call from Dad. I was on my lunch break and I think I went into shock, and all I could do was go back to work at the call centre, where I just operated on autopilot until my bosses told me to get to the hospital. To this day, 20 years later, Mum has fought the disease. She has never stopped. Even being on the cusp of dialysis, her strength and her ability to fight has been nothing short of remarkable.
    • Growing up with my brother, Luke, was pretty typical for young boys -- endless fighting, of course. We were, really luckily, on nine acres. We built tree houses and we had motorbikes. Luke had a Honda 50cc, and I had an old postie bike. It was a lot of fun. We had dozens of pets, and they all had their own names, even the sheep. My brother went on to become a beef cattle farmer who works hard to provide for his beautiful eight-year-old daughter, my niece, Miss Zarli Rose, who is feeling extra special today because she is in Canberra having a couple of extra days off school.
    • I went to public schools -- to Spreyton Primary School, Latrobe High School and to Don College. I won't say that my time at school was all roses; I suffered quite a bit of bullying from other kids and there were many times that I felt scared to walk down the halls. I knew that I was different and I was quiet, but I got through it thanks to some tremendous people who have become my lifelong friends. After college, many of us even lived together in an old country farmhouse, which I can say is owned by and very close to the business where a former PM ate an onion out of a box, skin and all. My mates and I weren't popular, but that didn't matter to us. We built the best memories and we shared a lot of firsts -- first loves, first heartbreaks, first cars and first car crashes. Last year was particularly challenging for us when we lost our mate Andrew. It was the first death in our group. He died suddenly from a heart attack. He was a genuinely caring person who, to this day, we all miss very dearly. Rest easy, my friend.
    • I have been fortunate in my life. I can say that I have never not had a job. I started working when I was 17 and still in college, folding and stacking women's clothing and underwear at Kmart in Devonport -- something that many people close to me know that it probably wasn't in my comfort zone to do, but I was keen to work and I gave it a red-hot crack. When I finished year 12, I worked full time at a couple of call centres in Devonport. These were run and owned by international companies. They both closed after taking massive subsidies from the state government, leaving a huge hole in the local economy.
    • Fortunately, at the Sitel call centre, I met my partner and the love of my life, Josh. Yes, I know -- Josh and Josh. After over 20 years, you get used to having the same name. I'm so thankful to our nosy lesbian friends, Laura and Joya, who invited us over to dinner and set us up, as I said, 20 years ago. We haven't been apart since. We have just moved back to Latrobe with our three cats, which we adopted from a local cat rescue who I can say do truly great work to save cats and kittens from cruelty. And I can confirm that we are those people that have our phones full of cat photos and videos!
    • It's not lost upon me -- the sense of responsibility of being Labor's first openly gay senator for Tasmania. I hope me being here today can give hope to young queer people that you, too, can come to this great place. But, more importantly, I hope you know that you're already seen, you're understood and you are represented. I acknowledge other LGBTQI+ MPs and senators and the contributions that they have made to progress for our community.
    • As a young person, I experienced some tough times for being who I am. There were some dangerous times when I was faced with violence and hatred. There were times when I wondered if I'd ever find someone to love and to love me back. I don't bring all this up as a sign of weakness but to give a sense of hope and a shining light to young queer people. If you are going through a tough time, if you're wondering if someone will love you, if you're wondering if things will get better, I want you to know that, yes, you can find love and that you are loved and that things will be okay. Find your safety net and latch on to what makes you happy.
    • RuPaul's Drag Race I acknowledge the efforts of Tasmania's Rodney Croome, his struggles and his strength and his outstanding contribution to gay rights and equality in Tasmania. My state was the last to decriminalise homosexuality and the only state to criminalise cross-dressing. And it's hard to imagine, in this time where is an international phenomenon, that such laws ever existed. Tasmania has come very far. We have the most progressive and inclusive discrimination, hate speech, relationship and gender-recognition laws, and I pay tribute to my Labor colleagues and activists who have worked so hard to change Tasmania and Australia for the better.
    • In 2005, I started working in the Australian Public Service at the ATO in Burnie. I spent 15 years helping small businesses comply with their tax obligations. It was a small office of around 50 or so workers, and, at that time, an APS3 job of around $50,000 was a huge deal in the north-west coast. The site grew over the years, and in 2014 a dark cloud seemed to hang over the site. There were massive attacks on the Public Service by the government of the day. Jobs were being lost, and there were multiple attempts to strip workers of their rights and the conditions that had been secured in bargaining and fought for over decades. Closure of the site was a real risk. It was at this point that Jess Munday and Jen Fitzgerald from the CPSU convinced me to become a union delegate. This turned out to be much more of a life-changing moment than I could have ever imagined.
    • I've always supported unions. My dad was a member of his union. And my first was the SDA at Kmart. I had never seen hands-on how much work union staff do to support their delegates and their members. My organiser, Jen, was a wealth of knowledge for just about everything and was able to support me in my new role. We instantly clicked, and we became mates. Soon after my election, I attended delegate training run by a comrade, Paul Blake. I went back to my workplace not only having the tools I needed to represent members but feeling this new sense of confidence that I could stand up to things happening and know that my union had my back. I represented members in the workplace on collective and individual matters. I took my workplace from two members to 40 per cent density in my first year as a delegate, and I was awarded the Unions Tasmania 2017 Delegate of the Year. I later became an elected section councillor for the tax section, representing members' views in broader union business.
    • In 2017, Josh and I moved to Hobart to take up career opportunities that weren't available in Burnie at the time. But for me this didn't last long, as in 2018 I took a 12-month sabbatical to work for the CPSU, and I never returned to the tax office. I'd found my calling. I was assigned a patch to represent all Tassie members at Centrelink, Medicare and child support, which is now Services Australia. The work was rewarding, even with long hours and calls late in the evening and on weekends. But I loved every moment of working with this group of members and delegates.
    • In 2018 through to 2023, the culture at DHS, now Services Australia, was rough. No matter the member or the issue that kept coming up, there was a theme that was always consistent: the employer always seemed to try to say no to a worker who wanted to access flexible arrangements, even when it was against the agreement or where it would cause hardship to the member. Some of the greatest travesties that I have worked with members on were a young mum who was denied access to flexible work arrangements when she was coming back from maternity leave, a volunteer firefighter who was being forced to use annual leave rather than paid miscellaneous leave to go and fight the bushfires that were raging on the mainland, a worker being denied part-time work to allow her to care for her disabled parent, and labour hire workers being sacked for exercising their right to participate in union activities.
    • Another common issue for some public sector workers was being punished or shamed for taking toilet breaks, and this started our national 'Don't rush to flush' campaign -- and it still gets brought out every now and then. I'm sure my comrades will agree.
    • Psychosocial hazards are common in many workplaces. I had sites where members were constantly calling me about their concerns about bullying, which triggered many work health and safety rights of entry. Never in my career had I experienced workers lining up to talk to me about how horrific their workplace was because of a rogue boss. To see workers change the culture of their workplaces and hold their bosses to account through speaking up and creating a positive reporting culture was a proud organiser moment.
    • In 2023, I took on a new role as a work health and safety lead organiser, providing internal advice in the union on work health and safety matters. I trained union staff and I provided real-time support to CPSU health and safety reps who were exercising their powers and functions in their workplace. This became incredibly important after a Centrelink worker was stabbed in the workplace at Airport West. I commend the response of the government for implementing a wide-ranging review into safety and security for Services Australia, and I acknowledge the efforts of CPSU members working in Services Australia who have tirelessly advocated for improved safety arrangements to ensure the safety of staff and their customers in their workplace. It's vital that as a government we prioritise worker safety as an integral part of service delivery, because everyone has the right to be safe at work.
    • Violence and aggression have no place in any workplace, and the work health and safety organiser in me couldn't pass on the opportunity, in my first speech, to encourage people to be kind when dealing with workers doing their job, whether it's in a supermarket, a restaurant or a Centrelink office. Kindness costs nothing, and it makes such a difference to a worker who is serving their community or their customers.
    • Public services are important. Public servants keep our country running, and this Labor government has done a huge amount of work to rebuild the capacity of the service after a decade of cuts, outsourcing and neglect. We should never forget that public services being provided by public servants is the best and most cost-effective way to serve the community and that outsourcing does nothing but degrade services and allow shonky business to make profits off people. Imagine sitting in an office doing the same job as the person next to you for 30 per cent less pay, with no sick leave, no holidays, no job security, while knowing that your employer is making huge profits off your labour. Shame.
    • I'd like to applaud Senator Gallagher, as the Minister for the Public Service, for her work to bring decency and respect back to the APS. And, of course, I applaud my union, the CPSU, so capably led by National Secretary Melissa Donnelly, for putting the rebuilding of the Public Service on the agenda and keeping it there. Piece by piece, union member by union member, workplaces are being repaired and rebuilt, and the flow-on effect from better workplaces is better outcomes for veterans, for pensioners, for people with disability, for jobseekers -- for all Australians.
    • The union movement is a family. Members are the union. They are the heart of their union, and it was an honour to serve. In Hobart, at the CPSU, I had four extremely close comrades. We helped each other every day to carry the often heavy hearts and emotions of our members and the delegates who were doing it tough, whether it was an issue affecting one person or many.
    • I'd like to acknowledge my friends and comrades who have travelled to be here today. Of special note are Mel Donnelly, CPSU Deputy Secretary Rebecca Fawcett, Tasmanian Regional Secretary Zac Batchelor, Jen, Sally, Leonie, Wendy, Brooke and others. It's amazing that you've come to be here with me today. I'd also like to acknowledge CPSU Governing Councillors Scott Plimpton and Paul Wray.
    • The CPSU and the Tassie union movement are mourning the loss of our comrade Paul Blake, who died unexpectedly on Saturday 19 July. Today would have been his 58th birthday. Paul worked incredibly hard for our movement until the moments before he died. He had a tremendous sense of wit, and I loved every moment of banter with him. There was not a person who met Paul who didn't respect him, and I'm told that even former senator Abetz was quite fond of the man! I'm sorry, Paul; I couldn't help having one last dig at you, my comrade. Paul was a mentor of mine; he was my friend, and I wouldn't be the person that I am without his guidance. The CPSU wouldn't be the union that we are, without Paul. Rest easy, comrade.
    • I'm so hopeful for the future and the opportunities a second-term Labor government presents for this country and the people of Tasmania. We can strengthen Medicare and public services. We can support workers with safer, secure and well-paid jobs. We can harness the opportunities from the Future Made in Australia plan and manufacture more things here. We can continue to listen to and learn from First Nations people and continue to work on closing the gap. We can support more Australians to realise the great dream of owning their own home.
    • For this amazing opportunity, I'm thankful to so many people, some I've already named and some I can't get to today. But I'd like to mention the following people: my friend and amazing new member for Braddon, Anne Urquhart; the CPSU; the AMWU Tasmanian State Secretary, Jacob Batt; AMWU National Secretary, Steve Murphy; Paul Erickson; the trade union movement; Senator Tim Ayres; Minister Julie Collins; Senator Carol Brown; Julian Hill MP; and, of course, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese -- thank you for placing your faith in me.
    • I'd like to thank my fellow new Labor class of 2025 senators for your camaraderie. I'd like to thank my Labor caucus colleagues, and I'd like to thank Senator Wong for the very warm welcome. To branch members of the party, the heart of the party: thanks for all the beautiful messages of support. You know who you are. To my staff, Sharifah, Kathryn and Riley: thanks for jumping on this wild ride with me.
    • To the Tasmanian people: today I've given you a little insight into my story -- who I am, where I've come from and what I stand for. I commit to working with the Tassie Labor team, with the Labor caucus and with you, to get outcomes and to fight battles alongside you. My door is open; my staff and I are looking forward to meeting you, to listen and to serve. Thank you.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Dolega, Senator Josh
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP); Josh Dolega (ALP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Josh Dolega (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "This became incredibly important after a Centrelink worker was stabbed in the workplace at Airport West. I commend the response of the government for implementing a wide-ranging review into safety and security for Services Australia, and I acknowledge the efforts of CPSU members working in Services Australia who have tirelessly advocated for improved safety arrangements to ensure the safety of staff and their customers in their workplace."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Collins, Senator Jessica [3]
  • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 17:27 [1]
    • 17:27 (): Pursuant to order, I now call Senator Collins to make her first speech and ask senators to extend the usual courtesies to her.
  • Jessica Collins, New South Wales, LP, 17:27 [30]
    • New South Wales Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 17:27 ( -- ) (): It's a great honour to give my maiden speech in the Senate chamber today. My political journey here has not been a conventional one. I didn't join the Liberal Party as a Young Liberal; I joined the Liberal Party in 2019 as a 35-year-old, when I was eight months pregnant with my fourth child. Five years later, I had the privilege of being preselected for the Senate. Tonight, I'm not going to tell my life story, but I want to share some of the things that shaped me and what I want to achieve in the next six years.
    • I'm a New Zealand born Australian. I moved with my parents and two big brothers from Queensland to New South Wales when I was 13 years old. When I finished high school, I had no idea what I wanted to do, so I did what so many uninspired 19-year-olds do and enrolled in an arts degree. It led me to anthropology, which, as it turns out, is not the study of ants! Nonetheless, I persevered, and the anthropology of Australia, the Pacific islands and Asia became the focus and passion of the next 10 years of my life.
    • I loved anthropology because I could immerse myself in cultures and environments unusual to me. I took every opportunity I had to engage with Pacific island culture. I travelled to a small village in the mountains of New Caledonia to better understand peace and conflict and everyday life for the indigenous Kanak people. Back in Brisbane, I would spend my weekends hearing the beautiful songs of Samoan church services and being welcomed into the families to share the umu that followed and to learn more about their experience of life in Australia.
    • Later I wrote a doctoral thesis about the Karen refugee community's resettlement from Burma to Brisbane. I spent time in their churches too, hearing their beautiful music and sharing in the feasts that followed. I was invited to their homes for tea and to their weddings and funerals. I participated in their ceremonial events. I stayed in refugee camps on the Thai-Burma border to learn about the power of transnational relationships for the over 100,000 people trapped in place and time since the early 1980s. There, I met some of the most resilient and kind-hearted people I've ever come across.
    • As I was waiting for my thesis to be reviewed, I was approaching 30 and wanted to start a family. However, I was single at the time. So I finally agreed to go on a date with someone I had been friends with for over a decade. Then, five days later, I was offered what I thought was my dream job lecturing at the University of Fiji. I was given the day to decide. I was over the moon, and I called my mother, who was surprisingly unenthusiastic and suggested I take the weekend to think about it. And I'm glad she did because I was given a counteroffer that weekend. Just 10 days after our first date, Ben took me for a walk to my favourite church overlooking the Brisbane River and got down on one knee in the churchyard. He had asked for my parents' permission just a few days earlier.
    • That weekend, I was faced with a big decision that so many professional women face: career or family. I know that every woman's decision on that is deeply personal and complex. But it was an easy decision for me, and we were married five months later at All Saints' Church, having our first child 12 months after that. We had four kids in four years, none of them being twins. Spending those years at home with my children has been the most rewarding experience of my life. It was also the hardest, for the simple reason that children are hard work. So I kept my mind busy. I wrote papers for publication and studied for a master's in global development, which included an internship with the Minister for International Development and the Pacific. That short time in the minister's office shifted my passion from academic research to policy development. And so, the following year, I nominated for preselection for the division of North Sydney. That preselection didn't eventuate. So, a couple of years later, I tried again, this time for the Senate. I lost that preselection, so I tried again five months later, this time for the now defunct division of North Sydney. But I lost that one too. Three weeks later, I tried again for another Senate casual vacancy, and I lost again.
    • Having lost three preselections in six months, some people were quietly suggesting to me that constantly losing all the time was making me look bad. But I've always believed that it's not how you win these things; it's how you lose them. As hard as it was to face my children every time I lost, I was never going to let them see me give up. From the bottom of my heart, thank you to all the Liberal Party members who put their faith in me to represent them in the Senate today. There are too many of you to name, and I know some of them would prefer not to be named. But I do want to single out one person and thank my local member, the honourable member for Lane Cove, Anthony Roberts. You backed me from the very start and never gave up on me. I hope I can represent the people of New South Wales with the same unwavering dedication that you have. God bless you, mate.
    • In all those years at home with the kids, it dawned on me that successive governments have failed to establish a family policy framework that is fit for purpose. The consistently declining Australian birth rate is now at an all-time low of just 1.5 babies per woman. There are many reasons why Australian women are having fewer babies, but we must face up to the reality that a declining birth rate is evidence that Australia's family policy framework is not fit for purpose. Family policy should be the natural home for the Liberal Party. As former prime minister John Howard recognised, we believe that the family unit provides the best social welfare system ever devised. In every culture I've studied and in my own experience family is the glue to a cohesive society and the backbone of a strong nation.
    • So what does fit-for-purpose family policy look like? Australia has a tax system that recognises the output of individuals but fails to appreciate the contribution of the family. Parents with children should be able to aggregate their marginal tax rates and file jointly. We are a nation of families, not individuals. Income splitting should not just be a tax strategy for the wealthy; it should be a basic right of the home. And we need to encourage bigger families. We should increase the tax-free threshold for a household every time they add a child to the family. When families grow, Australia prospers, and we should be incentivising that.
    • We also need to accept that the childcare subsidy system is broken. Childcare subsidies are not bringing down the cost of your child care; they are just increasing the burden of your taxes. The childcare subsidy should be abandoned and replaced with a childcare tax deduction. Parents should be free to choose where that childcare tax deduction is applied, because, if parents choose in-home care over private-equity-backed childcare conglomerates, they should not be disadvantaged. We need to rebalance the childcare industry back to its natural state -- where child care is a community service, not a profit-making machine.
    • After being a stay-at-home mum for seven years, I became a research fellow at the Lowy Institute, where I had the opportunity to develop Pacific islands policy and engage with Pacific leaders. I'd particularly like to thank Michael Fullilove, Herve Lemahieu, Amy Dobbin and Dan Flitton for their support during my time at the Lowy Institute. And I give a very special thank you to Jonathan Pryke, the ultimate legend of Pacific islands affairs, who first hired me at Lowy. You saw my time as a stay-at-home mum as a career strength, never a weakness, and, if there were more people with that kind of mindset, this country would be better off.
    • When Sir Frank Lowy founded the Lowy Institute in 2003, he had a vision: to help Australians better understand the global challenges shaping their lives. He wanted to take Australia to the world and bring the world to Australia. It was, in Sir Frank's words, 'an investment in ideas'. That vision is more important today than it ever was, because, while I grew up with relative peace in our region, my children are growing up in a very different geopolitical environment. In Australia, we need to have an honest conversation about what is going on in the world and what we will do to protect our place in it. As a baseline, we need a comprehensive national security strategy that articulates internal and external threats facing Australia and how we will get ahead of them. A current national security strategy will guide the political, intelligence and defence communities and inform the Australian people about the harsh realities we are facing -- something that has not been done by the political leadership for over a decade -- because, if Australia's political leadership were completely honest with the Australian people, the case for increasing defence spending would be a no-brainer.
    • In my third week of being a senator, I took part in the Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program, which is led by Lieutenant Colonel Andy Martin. I was embedded in the 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, known as 3RAR, or 'Old Faithful'. I joined them in Townsville as they commenced Exercise Talisman Sabre, where, in 2025, more than 30,000 military personnel from 19 nations honed their war-fighting skills. Old Faithful has a lethal reputation, and the heroes I had the honour of working alongside embodied its tradition of duty, honour, sacrifice and lethality. Over the week, we spent a few days riding in armoured personnel carriers, or APCs. I rode with commanding officer Dan Ellis and RSM Jai Cosgrove. We linked up with the soldiers across the massive training area as they prepared for an upcoming attack, and I had the immense privilege of speaking with many of these Australians who'd made the brave decision to serve their country. And it really hit home that the most powerful weapons we have are our people in uniform. While governments are willing to invest in hardware and technologies, too often they forget that people need investment too.
    • I was talking to one digger who has a one-year-old daughter and another on the way. He reckoned his baby girl was going to take her first steps any day now, and he knew it was unlikely that he would be there for that. Ultimately, this brave digger knew that sometimes you have to give up the things you love to protect the things you love. Even in peace time, our uniformed men and women give up so much that we easily take for granted. Sometimes it's the small things, like a shower. I didn't shower for a few days, but some of these soldiers will go for weeks, even months, without one. And sometimes it's the bigger things, like missing those first precious steps or the birth of the next child. Then there are the diggers who will pay the ultimate price for training at the highest intensity. It was a privilege to ride in the APCs with these soldiers. It was an honour just to stand next to them.
    • But our soldiers, sailors and airmen need more. They need weapons, not white papers. They need an industry ready to be repurposed should the need arise -- an industry that's continuously building, spurred on by hard and fast rules about minimum local content. Our top-heavy Defence Force needs to be more nimble and less risk averse. Removing personnel caps will help us grow our enlisted ranks. We need to bring recruitment back in house and give units the ability to recruit directly to their ranks. AUKUS is vital to our defence strategy, but we must ensure it does not compromise the resourcing needs of our other force elements.
    • We need to do so much better for our veterans, who spend years battling the effects of war and service, only to be failed by a clumsy and slow bureaucracy that has been holding back support for too many years and, for some, forever. We must never forget these are real people with real stories who were prepared to give up their lives for us and our children, and too many of them ultimately did.
    • War is always the last resort. Well before that comes deterrence and diplomacy. Our alliances abroad are critical to our security at home, but we cannot allow dependency to breed complacency. In our region we have a unique vulnerability. Next to us we have not small island states but a large ocean continent. We need a regional security strategy with integration at its core.
    • The Australian Defence Force has developed deep partnerships with Pacific nations, and we need to build on that. Australia should raise a seventh regular infantry regiment -- a Pacific regiment -- as an entirely rotational force. While Australia based, the Pacific regiment would take every opportunity offered by its regional allies to train in the islands. Pacific Islanders from nations without a defence force could enlist if their nation has a relevant security agreement with Australia. Pacific nations that already have a defence force could rotate their soldiers through the regiment if they have a security agreement with Australia too.
    • The Pacific regiment would be online to respond to civil unrest, natural disasters, election integrity and law and order requests from Pacific island governments. The regiment would integrate the region, institutionalise strategic trust and strengthen cultural ties through exchange. History has taught us that Pacific islands are a potential theatre of war. The knowledge exchange and training in Pacific islands terrain for Australian and Pacific soldiers would better prepare them for any conflict that may arise
    • Defence integration is important, but so too is economic integration. Australia's geopolitical strategy must be coupled with a competitive geoeconomic strategy. The PALM scheme represents one of our greatest opportunities to bring these together. The PALM scheme is a temporary visa program allowing Pacific island workers to plug labour gaps in Australia's primary industries. It's a brilliant piece of foreign and domestic policy, enhancing people-to-people links across our region, bringing economic sustainability to many Pacific islands and productivity to Australia. But it's failing because of red tape.
    • Look at a country like Tonga. Tongan workers in Australia send more money to Tonga than the Australian government does. Remittances far outweigh aid. This is important. Remittances are not money sent to Australian contractors or big bureaucracies, like most of our aid money is. These are hard-earned wages sent by Pacific Islander workers to support their families back home. This money is putting more food on the table, helping kids to get to school, paying for the GP, financing small businesses and stimulating local economies. Unfortunately, too much of this money sent home is swallowed up by fees, which can be as high as over 15 per cent of the remittance. Bringing down the cost of remitting is vital to a strong geoeconomic strategy for the region.
    • I don't have the room in this speech to detail my policy solutions on bringing down the cost of remittances -- it's a complex space, and I've published on it before -- but I will highlight one opportunity. Australia can help Pacific Islander workers to receive a portion of their weekly pay, including their superannuation, in their home countries. This is already happening in New Zealand. Setting up superannuation portability schemes, alongside removing the superannuation withdrawal tax, would have huge impacts on the livelihoods of Pacific Islanders. This early-withdrawal tax is unfair and overly burdensome.
    • Our Pacific family needs labour mobility, but it needs international trade too. Much like Australia, China is their biggest trading partner, but that too can shift. Pacific countries want to move beyond the aid relationship with Australia. We need to look at where we can bring Australian investment back to the region and take our starting position from aid and dependency to trade and prosperity.
    • Finally, a competitive geoeconomic strategy in the region would address the alarming problem of debanking. Our declining financial relationships with the region are a critical vulnerability for us and Pacific nations and are weaponised by geopolitical competitors to undermine us. We must help our Pacific family develop a harmonised banking regulation framework that will integrate with Australia's. This will reduce the cost of compliance, lower the risk profile and encourage more Australian and American banks to do business there.
    • We are blessed to live in the best country in the world, but we must never take it for granted. The freedoms we enjoy today exist because of the brave men and women before us who offered their lives to uphold the rules based order. As a middle power, Australians have a moral obligation to help where we can, understanding the limitations we have. While we swiftly imposed sanctions on Russia for its illegal invasion of Ukraine, for some reason we took a wet-wipe approach to a despotic regime much closer to home. Most of the refugees I met on the border were displaced from Burma, not Myanmar. Any subsequent name change by this antidemocratic government lacks legitimacy. These persecuted people and other minority ethnicities of Burma are innocent victims of the world's longest-running civil war.
    • We need to expand our economic sanctions, including on Burma's central bank, the primary instrument through which the Tatmadaw, the brutal army governing Burma, finances its wicked war against its own people. This is a pathetic regime that aims for nothing more than to oppress and kill and intimidate its own people. Don't fear what the sanctions will do to the people on the ground; the state has already failed them. Their services barely exist. I've seen, firsthand, Karen soldiers smuggling books and pencils so the children could learn how to read and write. I've seen temporary huts still housing people four decades later -- black plastic sheet roofs scorching in the heat of more than 40 summers -- where food is scarce but hopes run high. The lucky ones who eventually found a home in Australia had a second chance at a better life.
    • Before I close, I'd like to thank you all for being here tonight to hear what I have to say. I am deeply humbled. Thank you, mum and dad. The values I am here to fight for are the ones that you instilled in me. My 105-year-old grandmother, Pat, is watching from Wellington in New Zealand. Nana was the 11th person to sign up to the Women's Royal New Zealand Naval Service after World War II broke out. Nan, I love you so very much. Your grace and service inspire me every day. God bless you, and thank you for always answering your mobile phone so we can stay connected, even if it does take a few rings.
    • Hansard To my big brothers: I am the favourite child -- and it's now in the . Thank you for always looking out for me and always being there whenever I'd needed you.
    • And to my husband, Ben, who believes in me more than anybody else: I'm so glad that I agreed to marry you. That was the easiest and best choice I've ever made.
    • And to my beautiful children: you always gave me a reason to dust myself off and keep going. I will always put you first when I make my decisions. I will work hard to preserve and protect your hopes, aspirations and freedoms, because, when I fight for you, I fight for the rest of the people in the greatest country in the world. Thank you, Madam President. God bless you all, and may God bless Australia.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Collins, Senator Jessica
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP); Jessica Collins (LP)
    • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.

• Consideration resumed of the motion:
• That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
• That the risk of mass death from starvation in Gaza, with millions of Palestinians facing catastrophic hunger, is a result of Israel's aid blockade, and that it is critical the Australian Government intensify its efforts -- including diplomatic and economic measures -- to pressure the Israeli Government to open all border crossings and allow the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid.
• to which the following amendment was moved:
• Omit all words after "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:", substitute:
• That Israel's aid blockade, which risks mass death from starvation in Gaza and millions of Palestinians facing catastrophic hunger, is a breach of international law, and that it is critical the Australian Government continue intensifying its efforts including diplomatic and further action to pressure the Israeli Government to open all border crossings and allow the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid.
• David Shoebridge, New South Wales, AG, 17:56 2 min [5]
  • New South Wales 17:56 () (): Today this parliament will finally acknowledge just some of the horrors of the situation the people in Gaza have faced now for more than 18 months. I'd take a moment to pause and reflect on this being an occasion where we pass a motion that does not erase the people of Palestine and the struggle for a free Palestine, as this chamber did barely 18 months ago, because now we are acknowledging, as a collective, the appalling breaches of international law by the Israeli government, including the use of mass starvation as a tool of war against children, women, civilians and the people of Gaza.
  • But this motion should, obviously, be the starting point for genuine action, and it is unfortunate that, on the same day that we pass this motion, the Prime Minister dismissed calls for sanctions and material action to stop the genocide in Gaza as 'slogans', to use his word. That is deeply insulting to the millions of Australians calling for the Prime Minister to move from mere words to clear action, to pressure Israel to end the bombing and the killing of Palestinians, and to let food and aid flow into Gaza. The statement signed by Australia on 21 July of this year said:
  • We are prepared to take further action to support an immediate ceasefire ...
  • Yet that statement was rejected by Israel in less than 24 hours, and the government has taken no such action. As the Prime Minister himself acknowledged today, empty slogans without action will not feed starving children in Gaza.
  • I encourage the Prime Minister to reach out to the Australian Sanctions Office to understand how Australia is implementing its comprehensive prohibition on the two-way arms trade with Russia, as the clearest example for Israel, to end that two-way arms trade. That action, together with sanctions, is the action needed to meet this moment.
• Nick McKim, Tasmania, AG, 17:58 2 min [2]
  • Tasmania Australian Greens Whip 17:58 ( -- ) (): What's going on in Gaza right now is a brutal, calculated slaughter of innocent people. It is a mass murder of civilians. It is the deliberate, engineered use of hunger and starvation as a weapon of war, and people are dying in their droves. Babies are starving to death because of this slaughter and these war crimes.
  • This, of course, is being perpetrated by the government of Israel, but let's not kid ourselves that Australia is not complicit in these actions, because we are. We're not just complicit in those actions; we are complicit in the outcomes of those actions, in many ways. But this week we have had to listen to Senator Wong saying that weapons components that are being manufactured in Australia and exported and that are critical in the conduct of this genocide are non-lethal in nature. Give me a break. Stop trying to gaslight Australians, Prime Minister and Senator Wong. I say this to the Prime Minister: if you truly believe, as you have repeatedly stated this week, that these actions of the government of Israel are unacceptable, but you are not using every tool in your toolkit to bring about an end to these actions, then I say you are not being genuine. I say you are running a political line, because Australia should sanction the Netanyahu war cabinet at least to the same level it is sanctioning the Russian government.
• Penny Allman-Payne, Queensland, AG, 18:00 3 min [4]
  • Queensland 18:00 () (): There needs to be a fundamental shift in how the world views and treats Israel. Israel's genocidal intent has been clear for years, well before October 7, and it has only grown stronger and more sickening. Its leaders have called for mass extermination of Palestinians. They have praised the mass gang rape of Palestinian political prisoners, and they are now starving an entire population to the brink of death. Reports indicate that for many of those who have miraculously survived the carpet bombing of Gaza, starvation has reached a point where, even if survival is possible, long-term damage has already been done. Israel is not a credible actor nor any kind of future partner in peace. They are fundamentally disinterested in the humanity of Palestinians and in peace in the region, and they will say and do anything with no fear of consequences. They murder Palestinians, they bomb Lebanon, they bomb Iran, they bomb Yemen, they bomb Syria, and they do these things openly and advertise their genocide to the world.
  • One day, everyone will have been against this, and that is what we are beginning to see now. But this is bigger than Netanyahu and his war cabinet. Some people will try to paint it as the actions of a few politicians rather than as a systemic symptom of an ideology shared across government and the Knesset. Next time Israel or the US announce a truncated ceasefire or a hostage swap, or that they have allowed some aid into Gaza, don't let that be the end of the pressure, because they will turn around the next minute and they will continue the slaughter. This sudden onset of mild concern by various western governments, including Australia, must be the beginning of a campaign of maximum pressure against Israel. Words were never enough. Recognition is not enough. Israel must feel the full weight of global pressure, or else the killing will continue.
  • Question agreed to.
  • Original question, as amended, agreed to.
• Wendy Askew, Tasmania, LP, 18:03 [1]
  • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 18:03 Hansard ( -- ) (): by leave -- I ask that the opposition's opposition to that motion be recorded in the .
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Matters Of Urgency / Middle East
  • Speaker Count: 4
  • Speakers: David Shoebridge (AG); Nick McKim (AG); Penny Allman-Payne (AG); Wendy Askew (LP)
  • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.

• Raff Ciccone (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Victoria, ALP, 18:03 [6]
  • ( Senator Ciccone ) 18:03 (): The Senate will now consider the proposal, under standing order 75, from Senator Dean Smith, which has been circulated and is shown on the Dynamic Red:
  • Rising and volatile energy prices continue to cripple Australian families and small businesses under Labor, with household power bills skyrocketing by more than 40% during the first term of the Albanese Government, and the National Electricity Market recording a 139% surge in the average spot price between May and June 2025.
  • Is consideration of the proposal supported?
  • More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places --
  • The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: With the concurrence of the Senate, the clerks will set the clock in line with the informal arrangements made by the whips.
  • Interjection / ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT, The
• Dean Smith, Western Australia, LP, 18:03 5 min [6]
  • Western Australia 18:03 () (): Energy insecurity means economic insecurity for every Australian. Affordable, reliable energy underpins our national economy and supports productivity. Manufacturing, industry, agriculture and small business sit next to emerging technologies like cyber and artificial intelligence in needing a dependable, accessible national electricity grid. However, under this Labor government, Australians are experiencing energy price increases which go to the core of driving energy insecurity.
  • Today's CPI data shows that, under Labor, electricity prices have risen by more than 32 per cent, exclusive of the rebates. Labor promised Australians savings of $275 on annual electricity bills, but we know that prices have soared up to $1,300 more than Labor promised. Our charities are at the coalface of meeting the energy insecurity challenges of Australian families. In its June cost-of-living index, Anglicare Australia revealed:
  • For the majority of the households we modelled, energy bills are simply unaffordable.
  • Minister Bowen and Labor have overseen back-to-back hits to household budgets. In June 2025, the national electricity market, the NEM, recorded a staggering month-on-month surge in the average spot price of 139 per cent, increasing from May's $96.28 per megawatt hour to June's average of $232 per megawatt hour. The 2025 year-to-date average now sits 10.6 per cent higher than the same period in 2024. Australian families and Australian businesses, large and small, are struggling under the energy insecurity being created by this Labor government. And under the Australian Energy Regulator's default market offer for 2025-26, which came into force this month on 1 July, residential electricity bills have increased by up to 9.7 per cent, and small-business electricity bills have increased by up to 8.5 per cent. Canstar predicts that this will increase the average power bill by approximately $228.
  • GenCost The Labor government just cannot be believed when it comes to the cost of their energy and emissions reduction policies. They went to the 2022 election with three promises: a $275 cut to bills by 2025, 82 per cent renewables by 2030 and a 43 per cent emissions reduction target. They have failed or are failing on all three. Australians deserve to have clear visibility of the electricity grid transition costs so they can engage in this critical debate about our nation's energy future. It is deeply concerning that the Centre for Public Integrity recently revealed the Albanese Labor government to be one of the least transparent in the modern era. This secrecy also extends and characterises the secrecy they apply to energy policies. Yesterday, the CSIRO handed down its final report but refused to reveal its modelling on Labor's renewables integration costs.
  • (Time expired) Minister Bowen is recklessly chasing renewables at any cost -- a cost that is being borne by Australian families and Australian businesses, large and small, a cost that risks imperilling the competitiveness of our country, a cost that risks imperilling manufacturing businesses and a cost that risks imperilling heavy industry. Renewable infrastructure construction costs have soared, and it's time for the government to be honest about the cost of its emissions reduction plan.
• Varun Ghosh, Western Australia, ALP, 18:08 5 min [16]
  • Western Australia 18:08 () (): It's a time-honoured practice from this opposition to lament problems that we have but oppose the solutions. Good energy policy in this country requires vision, evidence based policies and measures, consistency and predictability. It needs us to be able to plan as a nation how we're going to generate the energy we need, and it needs that to permit investment in the relevant infrastructure and delivery mechanisms.
  • The government's policy is about delivering reliable, affordable and sustainable energy to the Australian people. Senator Smith mentioned two of those things but not the third, which was sustainability, and that sits at the heart --
  • Give me 10 minutes, and I'll get there.
  • Well, I always enjoy listening to you, Senator Smith, so I would have. There was an absence of sustainability in that discussion, and there is an absence of sustainability in the Liberals' energy vision. That was perhaps best illustrated in this chamber but a few days ago, when, voting on a net zero motion, you had two members of the coalition on this side of the chamber, you had two members of the coalition on that side of the chamber, and the rest were missing in action. They wouldn't nail their colours to the mast on one of the most important issues facing Australia.
  • That takes me to consistency and the importance of consistency, because, when those opposite were last in government, they had more than 20 different policies across a decade. No-one knew the direction, no-one could plan and no-one could invest. And that net zero vote simply shows that those opposite haven't learned or done the work necessary to go in and have the policies to solve this issue.
  • Senator Smith referred to the CSIRO report, and what that said, just this week, was that renewables remain the cheapest form of energy -- not coal, not gas, not nuclear. This government is a government that believes in harnessing renewables as part of Australia's energy future to drive down prices long term. We support that because it's a model that's good for the environment and good for the economy.
  • A decade of inaction has compromised our energy grid. The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis explains:
  • The existing coal fleet --
  • in Australia --
  • ... is ageing, and nearing the age when Australian coal power plants have typically retired ...
  • The reliability of coal-fired power stations typically declines as they age, due to the progressive degradation of critical plant components. Age-related wear and tear can increase the frequency of technical issues and outages as the plants need to reduce output or temporarily shut down ... to undertake necessary repairs.
  • That drives up prices and it reduces reliability. The volatility of the power prices we're seeing at the moment is a result of a failure to invest in our system long term.
  • And there's a study I want to discuss today, which was published just recently, in June this year, from the Griffith University's business school, which examined the counterfactual that is still proposed by senators opposite, and that is: what would happen if we cancelled renewables and reverted to coal and natural gas? What that study found was that the result would be an increase in energy prices of between 30 per cent and 50 per cent -- that's looking at it from 2025, if we went with coal and gas rather than renewables and batteries, firmed by gas. On a unit-cost basis, coal- and gas-fired generation were unambiguously the lowest cost technologies in the mid-2000s, setting aside the cost of CO2 emissions. But by 2025 the price of both coal and natural gas had increased at multiples above general rates of inflation. That study found that our 2025 counterfactual scenarios, which deploy new coal-fired and gas-fired generation with no renewables, proved to be surprisingly expensive -- more expensive than the model that's been proposed by the government.
  • The driver of higher prices in energy in Australia is not renewable energy; it's the failure to invest long term, the failure to plan properly. And that's one of the problems when you don't have consistency and vision in energy policy, because the consequences are felt much later. We're facing the consequences now of 10 years of poor energy policy and energy indecision. What Australia needs is a government that will back in successful strategies to fix and modernise our energy market, provide security to operators and encourage investment, and help the country move on from a decade of policy failure in this area. And, luckily for our country, that's exactly what they've got in the Albanese Labor government.
  • Interjection / Dean Smith, Western Australia, LP
  • Continue / Varun Ghosh, Western Australia, ALP
• Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 18:13 6 min [36]
  • Queensland 18:13 () (): Australian lives are getting more expensive every day because of net zero rorts. Power bills keep going up and the national debt keeps going up, because Australian taxpayers, renters, pensioners, small businesses and anyone who turns on a light are paying for rorts.
  • I use this opportunity to detail just one of these rorts -- it's not illegal, yet it's completely unethical -- occurring under the Capacity Investment Scheme. The Capacity Investment Scheme is a wind and solar slush fund that Minister Chris Bowen personally administers. I'm going to quote energy expert Aidan Morrison extensively, and we thank him for all of his contributions to the energy debate in this country. He said:
  • This is the story of how a fund chaired by former Labor PM Julia Gillard acquired a wind farm project just six days before Labor Energy Minister Chris Bowen underwrote its future revenues with taxpayer money.
  • Today we've learned Julia's fund is trying to flip it. For a profit.
  • HMC Capital's 'Energy Transition Fund' rushed to acquire the Neoen Victoria portfolio. They hadn't even raised any money in their fund. They closed with almost a billion dollars worth of borrowed money and IOU's.
  • Less than a week later, Chris Bowen announced Kentbruck Wind Farm to be successful in the first round of the Capacity Investment Scheme. My rough calculations suggest they will receive something like a billion dollars from taxpayers (and maybe much more) over 15 years.
  • Sweet deal. A billion dollars of fancy financial monopoly money one week. A billion dollars of promised taxpayer dollars the next.
  • ... ... ...
  • Unlike the UK who publish a 'going rate' for technology subsidies, our renewables --
  • unreliables --
  • are subsidised through a secret tender process --
  • under the Capacity Investment Scheme. He went on to say:
  • Every project gets to ask for whatever revenue they want to proceed. @AEMO_Energy --
  • that's the Australian Energy Market Operator --
  • facilitates a secret beauty pageant, where they award points for things like indigenous participation or community engagement, alongside financial value.
  • And Chris Bowen makes the final call.
  • The bids remain secret. There's no cap to the pay-outs. Since AEMO is a private company, there is no scope for an FOI --
  • freedom of information --
  • request, and AEMO aren't not subject to parliamentary oversight through Senate Estimates.
  • So --
  • based on the public information --
  • no-one can ever prove an allegation that Bowen has bestowed special favour on a friend's project if that was what he did. But equally, he can never prove that he selected strictly according to merit. We are just expected to trust the black-box of Bowen's subsidies.
  • Mr Morrison continues in a reply to his post:
  • Originally it always appeared to me that @DCCEEW --
  • the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water --
  • would administer the scheme.
  • But Bowen is determined they don't administer it. In fact, going so far as to change the National Electricity Law to make it possible for AEMO Services to do it, and making an interim request to AEMO.
  • ... ... ...
  • He could have just used the department, but that would make the process more transparent and accountable to parliament. He's basically cutting corners to cut out any chance of oversight.
  • In Mr Morrison's original post, he says:
  • Every dollar of profit in this industry --
  • the so-called solar and wind industry --
  • is really a cheque signed by a politician, with Chris Bowen signing all the biggest cheques, worth untold billions, in the next three years.
  • It's all legal. It's all official. And it's absolutely obscene.
  • The most concerning part of the Capacity Investment Scheme is that we have no idea how big it is. Right now, tens of billions of dollars may be getting handed out in lock-in contracts lasting for the next 15 years. Labor created the Capacity Investment Scheme in 2023. It's since proven extremely popular with solar and wind developers. I wonder why. Now, Minister Bowen wants to expand the program 15 per cent to 40 gigawatts. How many billions of dollars will all this cost taxpayers? We will likely never know. How much are overseas foreign companies ripping out of Australian taxpayers' pockets under the Capacity Investment Scheme? We will never know. With this level of secrecy, rorts are almost guaranteed -- and for what?
  • GenCost GenCost The biased, discredited CSIRO report on the cost of electricity was released just this week. You only have to skim the Centre for Independent Studies' energy publications to understand how, yet even CSIRO had to admit that the lower estimate for coal-fired power is cheaper than wind and solar. Now they admit it, after their fraudulent report. That's despite a secret model the CSIRO refuses to release to the public and a number of assumptions purpose-designed to make coal look worse than reality -- fraud. Fundamentally, Australians have been lied to repeatedly by government agencies. Ditch the economic nonsense from net zero. Ditch the net zero nonsense, in fact. End the corruption. Put Australians first.
• Leah Blyth, South Australia, LP, 18:19 5 min [4]
  • South Australia Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 18:19 ( -- ) (): Today I rise to speak about the challenge confronting every household, every business and every community in Australia: the rising cost of power, which skyrocketed more than 40 per cent during the first term of the Albanese government. Net zero is driving a rapid and uncompromising shift to renewable energy. It's reshaping our economy, our communities and our way of life. It is a shift that demands honesty about who pays, who benefits and who bears the burden. Those opposite must be honest with the Australian people, with farmers, with small-business owners and with families. They must admit that this energy transition is not free, it is not magical and it is not painless. It is sending manufacturing offshore, driving agriculturalists off their land, sending businesses broke and driving families and businesses to the brink. On top of this, it is being funded by the taxpayer, which, make no mistake, means your money. Whether it's through higher inflation and taxes, steeper power bills or lost economic opportunity, the cost is real and the burden is growing.
  • Inflation is largely being driven by the energy transition. Labor cannot be believed when it comes to the cost of their energy and emissions reduction policies. They went to the 2022 election with three promises: a $275 cut to power bills, which I, like many other Australians, am still waiting for; an 82 per cent renewables target by 2030; and a 43 per cent emissions reduction. So far, we are yet to achieve any of those targets, and it is fair to say that the renewables target won't be reached. Every extra dollar spent on ever-rising energy bills is a dollar less for groceries, for child care and for mortgage repayments. It's not just about households feeling the pinch. Businesses large and small are grappling with unpredictable costs, shrinking margins and mounting pressure to absorb new compliance requirements. Subsidies for solar panels and electric vehicles, while appealing on paper, often benefit wealthier households, leaving working families behind. The good intentions behind the energy transition do not pay the bills; families do, and many of them are already stretched beyond their limits. Those opposite speak of equity and inclusion, but the reality is that families on the minimum wage, those working two jobs just to make ends meet, are not the ones installing rooftop solar or buying Teslas. They are the ones who pay more at the checkout, more on their rent and more on their power bills.
  • This transition, as it stands, is deepening inequality. Our farmers, the lifeblood of Australia's food security, under the net zero agenda, face strict limits being imposed on their land use and their livestock emissions. That means slashing herd sizes to cut methane, gutting income and driving up beef prices for everyday Australians. Green farming sounds good in a press release, but for the farmer on the ground it can mean tens of thousands of dollars in costs with no guarantee of return. And the bureaucracy! Complex carbon farming schemes, consultants, forms and red tape. We're asking our farmers to be environmental auditors just to stay afloat. It's absurd. Worse still, prime agricultural land, land that feeds us all, is being swallowed up by wind turbines and solar farms. Farmers are losing the very ground they depend on, all to meet a target funded by their own taxes. And when our local producers go under, we will all pay more. The impact on small business is equally stark. Switching from gas to electric, swapping diesel vehicles for electric or installing new compliant equipment all comes with an upfront cost many small operators simply cannot afford.
  • The subsidies propping up this transition are staggering, and emissions under Labor are actually rising. This is not a call to abandon environmental responsibility. Every Australian wants a sustainable future, clean air, preserved landscapes and a healthy environment for generations to come, but sustainability must be more than environmental. It must also be economic and social, and it must be fair. We need practical solutions, and we need to invest in base-load power, not just intermittent sources. We need to reduce regulatory burdens on small businesses, and we need to ensure that farmers, families and communities are partners in this transition, not casualties of it.
• Richard Dowling, Tasmania, ALP, 18:24 5 min [15]
  • Tasmania 18:24 Australian Australian () (): It's always interesting when the coalition talk about energy in this place, particularly now they're in opposition. Maybe if they'd taken the topic more seriously when they were in government, they might not have any reason to complain about cost of energy today. After nearly a decade in government, they had no fewer than 23 energy policies -- I think it's still counting -- all of which were abandoned, leaving the Albanese government to pick up the pieces of the mess they left behind. In fact, under the coalition government, Australians suffered some of the highest price increases among industrialised economies around the world, and electricity prices increased by four times the OECD average in Australia. It would be nice if they could resolve where they actually sit on energy policy. As I said, there were 23 energy policies and it looks like they are still going. I'm trying to keep track of it. I picked up the today to see if I could work out where they're at. There was an interesting column by the 's editor-at-large, Paul Kelly, titled 'Rejecting net zero will condemn Liberals to electoral oblivion'. The column starts:
  • The Liberal Party faces a moment of truth. Does it still aspire to be a governing party for Australia or is its future as a right-wing echo chamber for conservatives raging against progressive dominance on climate change?
  • It's a great question. I would recommend the column to anybody who hasn't read it.
  • By contrast, our government has listened to the experts and we've backed reliable, affordable and clean energy. Those are the three pillars. You can't just do one and you can't do two. You've got to meet all three pillars if you're serious about energy policy in this country. Importantly, we've provided the certainty to get investment flowing, to secure the jobs we need now and into the future. I am proud to say that Australia is producing a record amount of renewable electricity and our emissions now are lower than when our government took office.
  • GenCost While we've been focused on rolling out cleaner and more reliable energy to power our nation, it seems the coalition -- at least some of them -- remain committed to the most expensive form of energy: nuclear. So what do the experts say on this? We've heard a lot about the report from the CSIRO and AEMO -- the Energy Market Operator. I will quote from the statement accompanying the release of that report:
  • ... renewables remain the lowest-cost new-build electricity generation technology, while nuclear small modular reactors ... are the most costly.
  • This is confirmation that the government's plan for a fairer, cleaner and more reliable energy system is the right plan for Australian households. The report found that, even accounting for the cost of firming and storage, renewable energy continues to be the lowest-cost new-build technology, underscored further by the falling cost of batteries.
  • We aren't just focused on renewables and storage. We are taking strong action to provide energy bill relief to Australian households and businesses. People complain that they are waiting for their discount on their power bill, but, unfortunately, the coalition has decided to oppose relief at every step of the way. It's quite ironic when you consider how much they've complained about energy prices. They had a chance to do something about it, but they have found a reason to oppose cost-of-living relief again and again. Despite this, we've provided three rounds of energy bill relief to homes and businesses to ease the burden of bills while doing the well-overdue work of reforming our economy to transition to a renewables led economy.
  • I would also encourage households to check what other resources there are to make sure they are getting the cheapest energy plan. The ACCC has reported that some 80 per cent of households could be paying less if they switched to a better deal. The government is determined to drive competition in the market, and there are some great resources out there. Energy.gov.au and the AER's Energy Made Easy website can help billpayers find the cheapest plan.
  • Another way we're helping households is through the Cheaper Home Batteries Program. Barely a month in, this program has seen 16,000 households take advantage of it and add storage to their homes as more Australians embrace renewable energy. The government's Cheaper Home Batteries Program will bring down the cost of a typical battery by around 30 per cent and will save households with existing rooftop solar up to $1,100 off their power bill every year.
  • To finish, I want to go back to the choice we face here, because we are debating Australia's energy future. Again, I think Paul Kelly summed it up nicely for the Liberal Party:
  • Does it still aspire to be a governing party for Australia or is its future as a right-wing echo chamber for conservatives raging against progressive dominance on climate change?
  • ... ... ...
  • What do they want? Government-financed new coal-fired power stations, the sure road to electoral oblivion?
  • I could not agree more.
• Jane Hume, Victoria, LP, 18:29 [11]
  • Victoria 18:29 () (): I rise to speak on Senator Dean Smith's MPI today because it is indeed a matter of public importance. The most inconvenient truth that the Labor Party will not acknowledge is that affordable and reliable energy has underpinned our country's prosperity for decades, and that is particularly the case in my home state of Victoria. But the reality that's facing households, small businesses and industries today is stark, because under this government Australians are experiencing an energy price crisis. Not only are record numbers of people struggling to pay their energy bills; we're seeing more frequent threats of blackouts in our grid.
  • As so often is the case with Labor, they seem to ignore those truths. They're quite happy to have the spin, but there is no substance behind the promises they make. Let me remind you of some of those promises. The most obvious one, made prior to the 2022 election -- and it was said over 90 times -- was that they would reduce energy prices by $275. Well, we are still waiting. There has been no reduction in energy prices. In fact, it's been quite the opposite. Three years on, that cut is nowhere in sight. Instead, over the first term of an Albanese government, household power bills skyrocketed by more than 40 per cent. Power prices are now up $1,300 more than was promised by this government. Now, that's extraordinary. It's eye-watering.
  • Almost every business that I walked into over the past three years has listed energy bills as their No. 1 cost pressure. It didn't matter whether it was a butcher, or a cafe or a hairdresser that we were visiting, these small businesses were talking about bills and how they had not increased by small amounts but by an extraordinary amount -- thousands of dollars.
  • The only thing that Labor has delivered is back-to-back hits to household budgets. In fact, between May and June this year, just two months after the election, the national electricity market recorded a 139 per cent surge in the average spot price. Let me say it again: a 139 per cent surge in the average spot price in just two months since the election. The 2025 year-to-date average now sits at 10.6 per cent higher than it did in the same period in 2024. Under the Australian Energy Regulator's default market offer for this year, 2025-26, which came into force on 1 July, residential electricity bills have increased by up to 9.7 per cent, and electricity bills for small businesses are up by 8.5 per cent. That's nowhere near the $275 cut that was promised.
  • Not only did they promise that prices would come down; they also promised there would be 82 per cent renewables by 2030 and that emissions would be reduced by 43 per cent. Once again, Labor's promise was nothing more than hollow. They are very small on delivery. In fact, the government is nowhere near its 82 per cent target, as experts are forecasting. The most optimistic scenario is that it may reach 65 per cent. But at what cost? Even Labor's own longtime adviser Professor Ross Garnaut has claimed the government will miss its target by 'a big margin'. They are his words, not mine.
  • When it comes to the 43 per cent emissions reduction target, the Climate Change Authority has calculated we'll need a 15-megatonne reduction annually. Instead, emissions are increasing under Labor. In fact, last year they were around six million tonnes higher than they were under the coalition government. Emissions have gone up under Labor. Don't believe what they're telling you. They have gone up. So it's costing you more and you're getting less for what you are paying.
  • Labor is recklessly chasing a renewables-at-any-cost price at the expense of the grid, at the expense of families, and at the expense of businesses. It's not working to reduce your emissions. It isn't working for households and businesses who are paying those bills. We need to do more. We need to reduce emissions, don't get me wrong. I believe that, fundamentally. But this is a pathway to destruction. It's not a pathway to prosperity.
  • I want to finish by reading you a text that I got in the chamber from my mother, who is on a set income. She said: 'I need your help, if not this weekend then soon. I'm sorry to interrupt you while you're in Canberra. In the past my electricity bills have been around the $500 mark. I just got one for $1,500. I am panicked. I don't know what to do. They talk about negotiating around a reasonable price' -- I think she means "shopping around" -- 'but I have no idea how to do that. Can you please help me?' When I said, 'Yes, of course, I'll come home and I will help you this weekend,' she said: 'Thanks. That wretched little twerp Bowen. This is paying for his nonsense and lies.'
  • That's one customer. Heaven help Australians that are suffering under Labor's energy price crisis.
  • ( Senator Chandler ): The time for the debate on the MPI has expired.
  • Interjection / Claire Chandler (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Tasmania, LP
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Matters Of Public Importance / Energy
  • Speaker Count: 7
  • Speakers: Raff Ciccone (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT) (ALP); Dean Smith (LP); Varun Ghosh (ALP); Malcolm Roberts (PHON); Leah Blyth (LP); Richard Dowling (ALP); Jane Hume (LP)
  • Rational Thought Positives: Dean Smith (LP): data with source signal: "However, under this Labor government, Australians are experiencing energy price increases which go to the core of driving energy insecurity. Today's CPI data shows that, under Labor, electricity prices have risen by more than 32 per cent, exclusive of the rebates."; Malcolm Roberts (PHON): source-backed reasoning: "With this level of secrecy, rorts are almost guaranteed -- and for what? GenCost GenCost The biased, discredited CSIRO report on the cost of electricity was released just this week."; Malcolm Roberts (PHON): source-backed reasoning: "You only have to skim the Centre for Independent Studies' energy publications to understand how, yet even CSIRO had to admit that the lower estimate for coal-fired power is cheaper than wind and solar. Now they admit it, after their fraudulent report."; Richard Dowling (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "So what do the experts say on this? We've heard a lot about the report from the CSIRO and AEMO -- the Energy Market Operator."; Richard Dowling (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "This is confirmation that the government's plan for a fairer, cleaner and more reliable energy system is the right plan for Australian households. The report found that, even accounting for the cost of firming and storage, renewable energy continues to be the lowest-cost new-build technology, underscored further by the falling cost of batteries."
  • Speaker Response Positives: Varun Ghosh (ALP): responded to Dean Smith (LP): "Senator Smith mentioned two of those things but not the third, which was sustainability, and that sits at the heart -- Give me 10 minutes, and I'll get there."; Varun Ghosh (ALP): responded to Dean Smith (LP): "Well, I always enjoy listening to you, Senator Smith, so I would have."; Varun Ghosh (ALP): responded to Dean Smith (LP): "Senator Smith referred to the CSIRO report, and what that said, just this week, was that renewables remain the cheapest form of energy -- not coal, not gas, not nuclear."; Jane Hume (LP): responded to Dean Smith (LP): "Victoria 18:29 () (): I rise to speak on Senator Dean Smith's MPI today because it is indeed a matter of public importance."
  • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Queensland 18:34 () (): by leave -- I nominate myself as whip for the purposes of the Selection of Bills Committee, to replace Senator Cadell.
• ( Senator Chandler ): Pursuant to the order agreed yesterday, the Senate will now consider the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025.
• Interjection / Claire Chandler (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Tasmania, LP

• First Reading / Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP, 18:35 [4]
  • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 18:35 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
  • Question agreed to.
  • Bill read a first time.
• Second Reading 47 min [8]
  • Tim Ayres, New South Wales, ALP, 18:35 [134]
    • New South Wales Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science 18:35 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That this bill be now read a second time.
    • Hansard I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in .
    • Leave granted.
    • The speech read as follows --
    • In the last few weeks Australians right across the country have been shocked and sickened by the news in Victoria.
    • A person arrested and charged with multiple heinous offences against children.
    • Offences allegedly committed in child care centres.
    • The mums and dads of thousands of children are now dealing with the fear that their children could be hurt or sick, and the trauma of getting them tested.
    • This matter remains before the courts.
    • But I have been pretty blunt in the last few weeks.
    • People have been arrested and convicted for offences like those alleged before.
    • And governments of different colours, State and Federal have taken action.
    • But not enough.
    • And not fast enough.
    • That's the truth.
    • We have to do everything we can to ensure the safety of our children when they walk -- or are carried -- through the doors of an early childhood education and care service.
    • At centres big and small. But not just there. In family day care, and in-home care and at outside school hours care.
    • And this Bill is part of that.
    • In short, it will give us the power to cut off funding to child care centres that aren't up to scratch when it comes to safety and quality.
    • Services that don't meet the standard when it comes to safety and quality, or where they are in breach of the law or are acting in a way that puts the safety of children at risk.
    • This power will apply to all forms of early education and care that are eligible for the Child Care Subsidy.
    • Centre-based day care.
    • Family Day Care.
    • In Home Care.
    • And Outside School Hours care too.
    • Funding is the big weapon that the Australian Government has to wield here.
    • Australian taxpayers are the biggest funders of child care centres.
    • We do that through the Child Care Subsidy.
    • $16 Billion a year.
    • Centres can't operate without it.
    • It covers about 70 per cent of the cost of running the average centre.
    • It pays for things like wages and rent and electricity.
    • This legislation gives us the power to suspend or cancel that funding if a centre is not meeting the quality, safety and other compliance requirements that are put in place by our national system of early childhood regulation.
    • This is how that system works.
    • Education and Care Services National Law The sets the standards we expect child care centres to meet.
    • State Government Regulators are responsible for rating centres and enforcing the standards.
    • Most centres meet the standards now, but not all.
    • If State Regulators think there is a real and imminent threat to safety they can shut a centre on the spot.
    • And they do.
    • Sometimes though they will identify problems in centres that can and need to be fixed.
    • And sometimes those problems remain unfixed.
    • That's where this legislation comes in.
    • The real purpose of this legislation isn't to shut centres down but to raise standards up.
    • To make sure that the safety and quality in child care centres is what parents expect and children deserve.
    • This is how it will work.
    • It will give the Secretary of my Department the power to take into account a provider's quality, safety and compliance history when considering whether a provider should be approved to administer the Child Care Subsidy, whether they should continue to be approved, or if they should be approved to operate a new service.
    • That has never been part of the Child Care Subsidy system since it commenced in 2018. It will be now.
    • This change will tie a centre's eligibility to administer the Child Care Subsidy directly to their record on quality, safety and compliance.
    • And it will allow the Secretary of my Department to cut off access to the Child Care Subsidy where standards are not being met.
    • That might mean cutting funding to an existing provider or service, or denying a provider the ability to expand until they have met the required standards.
    • Under these changes, the Secretary will be able to impose conditions on a provider's approval, or to move immediately to a process to suspend or cancel that approval on the basis of safety and quality concerns.
    • Where conditions are imposed, a provider must meet those conditions within a specified timeframe if they want to maintain their approval.
    • This could include a condition that the provider comply with directions from their state regulator. It might require them to follow a quality improvement plan or hire a quality and safety expert to help them lift their standards.
    • As I said a moment, the Secretary of my Department cab also move immediately to a process to suspend or cancel a provider on the basis of quality and safety concerns. That involves issuing a formal notice to the provider requiring a response within 28 days.
    • If the provider doesn't give a good explanation in that period, the Secretary can cancel or suspend their approval.
    • It's a process that permits providers an opportunity to engage with my Department where they have a genuine commitment to improve.
    • These powers will be used in close collaboration with states and territories, backing in their core role regulating quality and safety.
    • It means the Commonwealth can use the power of the Child Care Subsidy funding to lift the standards of providers not doing the right thing -- and ensure those that aren't up to scratch don't get access to Commonwealth funding.
    • This Bill also expands the Commonwealth's powers to publish information about providers that are sanctioned for non-compliance.
    • The Secretary of my Department already has the power to publicise actions such as suspending or cancelling a provider's approval for the Child Care Subsidy.
    • The information is available in the Enforcement Action Register on the Department of Education website, along with other information such as how the department issues infringement notices and imposes conditions on approvals.
    • This Bill expands that power to include the power to publicise when a provider is refused approval for a new service.
    • The Bill also gives the Secretary of my Department the power to publish other compliance action taken against providers, such as when conditions are applied -- including the details of those conditions.
    • Or where an infringement notice has been issued, including the details of the notice, such as the alleged contravention and the fine amount.
    • Conditions and infringements are very important, because they point to specific things a provider must do or fix to stay eligible for the Child Care Subsidy.
    • Parents should know when a centre their child attends, or one they are thinking of using, is subject to a condition or has received an infringement.
    • When this legislation is passed, the Secretary of my Department will expand the breadth of the Enforcement Action Register to include those things I have just outlined.
    • I have asked the Secretary of my Department to ensure the Enforcement Action Register provides parents and other organisations with as much information as possible, given the circumstances of each matter.
    • Providing more detailed information on compliance actions and refusals of new services is important to ensure parents have the information they need to make one of the most important decisions in their child's early years.
    • About who they want to put their trust in to care for their child.
    • It will also ensure transparency for company directors and board members, who may not be directly responsible for the daily management of the provider, but who play an important role in ensuring their organisations are taking the steps needed to keep children safe in early education and care.
    • The Bill also gives the Commonwealth's authorised officers more powers to do their job. It allows them to perform spot-checks and enter premises without consent during operating hours to detect non-compliance across the sector.
    • It means that the Commonwealth's officers don't need to get a warrant or other pre-authorisation to inspect a centre, an outside schools hours care service, or family day care service.
    • These Commonwealth powers largely mirror arrangements in place for state and territory regulators of early child and education care under the National Law and Regulations.
    • The primary purpose of these compliance officers is to monitor compliance with the family assistance law. This is a serious issue in early education and care.
    • Over the last three years, this Government has allocated $221 million to detect and prevent Child Care Subsidy fraud, and this has helped claw back around $318 million for the taxpayer.
    • These new powers are an important part of this.
    • If while the compliance officers are there, they identify safety and quality concerns, they will also be able to share that information with State Government regulators to take action.
    • A person who does not co-operate with an authorised person seeking access commits a criminal offence -- and is liable to a civil penalty.
    • The Bill also includes a number of other integrity measures.
    • It will allow the Secretary of my Department to delegate the power to apply for a monitoring warrant to an appropriately qualified Executive Level officer.
    • Monitoring warrants are an effective tool in conducting Child Care Subsidy fraud and compliance investigations. These changes will streamline processes allowing warrants to be requested and issued more quickly.
    • The Bill also makes amendments to allow the Secretary of my Department to delegate their existing power to appoint an appropriately qualified and experienced expert to conduct audits of large child care providers.
    • This power is expanded to allow delegation to a Senior Executive Service employee. This will further streamline the process for appointing auditors, an important tool in ensuring integrity and compliance in the sector.
    • The Bill also makes important changes to how gap fees are collected from families who use Family Day Care and In Home Care.
    • The Bill makes an amendment to require all Family Day Care and In Home Care Providers to collect Child Care Subsidy gap fees directly from families. This will reduce the administrative burden on individual educators so they can focus on providing education and care to children. It will also improve transparency and integrity of Child Care Subsidy funding.
    • Mr Speaker, the purpose of this Bill is not to shut child care centres down.
    • It's to raise standards up.
    • This is not about leaving parents stranded without care for their children because of fixable or minor short-comings at their service.
    • But this legislation is also not an idle threat.
    • Services, whether they are centre-based day care, or family day care, or in-home care, or outside school hours care, know what they have to do to consistently meet national quality standards.
    • Providers that can improve their services to meet the standard will get the chance to do that.
    • Services that don't, can't, or won't will lose their access to funding.
    • I think that's fair. And I think most Australian parents will too.
    • Mr Speaker, this Bill isn't the only thing we have to do to improve safety in child care centres.
    • There is a lot more.
    • After Ashley Paul Griffith was arrested and charged in Queensland with multiple child sex offences, Education Ministers across the country commissioned the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority -- ACECQA -- to conduct a Child Safety Review.
    • Education Ministers have agreed in principle to the key recommendations of that review.
    • Some have been implemented. But there is more work that needs to be done.
    • That includes establishing a National Educator Register to help track workers from centre to centre. And from state to state.
    • It also means mandatory child safety training to support the 99.9 per cent of educators who care for our children every single day and do a fantastic job, to help them to recognise people who are up to no good.
    • After 4 Corners exposed appalling examples of abuse and neglect on 17 March this year, the New South Wales Government commissioned Chris Wheeler, a former Deputy New South Wales Ombudsman, to undertake an independent review of the New South Wales Early Childhood Education and Care Regulatory Authority.
    • The Wheeler Review recommends increasing penalties on services for offences that are largely factual or procedural, and for which prosecution is currently the only avenue available.
    • It also recommends services be required to display their compliance history alongside their quality ratings to help families make informed choices about child care.
    • The Wheeler Review also recommends allowing the regulator to require that a provider install CCTV when they identify a potential risk to the health and safety of children at a service, or when the service has failed to meet quality standards for an unreasonable period of time.
    • These recommendations and more will be considered by Education Ministers when we meet next month.
    • The other area where serious work is needed is to improve the operation of Working with Children Checks.
    • Problems here were identified a long time ago.
    • The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse recommended the Commonwealth Government facilitate a national model for Working with Children Checks.
    • At the moment the systems in different states work differently.
    • In some States the Working with Children Check is valid for five years. In others it's two or three years.
    • In some States only people over eighteen working with children require a Check. In others this is required from the age of fourteen or fifteen.
    • Jurisdictions also differ in how they assess both criminal and non-conviction information, as well as patterns of behaviour.
    • There are also issues with getting real time updates to Working with Children Checks and information sharing between jurisdictions.
    • This system isn't run by Education Ministers. In some States it is run by the Attorney General. In others it is Ministers with responsibility for Child Protection, Human Services, or Families and Communities.
    • Next month the Commonwealth Attorney General will also bring her state and territory counterparts together to address these serious issues.
    • Mr Speaker, there is no more serious work than this.
    • I want to thank my friend and colleague, Senator Jess Walsh, the Minister for Early Childhood Education and Youth, for her leadership on quality and safety in early learning and her work in bringing this Bill to the Parliament.
    • And I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Minister for Education and their teams for the serious and professional and bipartisan way they have engaged with us on this legislation.
    • To make sure we get it right.
    • It's what mums and dads across the country want of us. And expect of us.
    • They are not interested in excuses.
    • They expect action.
    • They expect all levels of Government to work together and the people that run child care services to join in as well.
    • We all know, no party, no government, State or Federal, has done everything we need to do here.
    • That's obvious.
    • But I think everyone here is determined to do what needs to be done to rebuild confidence in a system that parents need to have confidence in.
    • A system that more than a million mums and dads rely on to care for and educate the most important people in their world -- their children.
    • This legislation is an important part of that.
    • It's not everything.
    • The truth is this work will never end.
    • But this is an important step.
    • And I commend this Bill to the House.
  • Jonathon Duniam, Tasmania, LP, 18:35 15 min [17]
    • Tasmania Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 18:35 ( -- ) (): I am pleased to make a contribution to the debate on the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025. At the outset, I want to indicate that the opposition, of course, will be supporting the legislation that the government has brought forward, because this is an important issue that needs urgent resolution. It's something that, as has been said several times in this debate, is above politics -- support for families and their children, the users of the childcare system; ensuring that the system is operating at the best standard; and that protections are available are matters that are everyone's responsibility. To that end, as has been publicly reported, Sussan Ley, the Leader of the Opposition, wrote to the Prime Minister some time ago to offer bipartisan support in ensuring that this legislation is dealt with urgently.
    • I want to pay tribute to Jason Clare, the Minister for Education, who has been nothing short of professional and forthcoming with information and providing briefings. Every time we've had a request or a question, he has been immediate in his response. It is that sort of professional engagement that, I have to say, restores my faith in our ability as a parliament to do good things for our community. I pay tribute to him for what he did in bringing us to this conclusion.
    • I also want to say that, while we will canvass difficult issues -- we will be dealing with a range of horrendous events that have brought us to the need to legislate to protect Australian children in childcare settings -- 99.9 per cent of childcare workers in our country are good people motivated by a desire to do the right thing, to care for our children, to educate our young and to ensure that the best outcomes are available for them. They go to work every day with a desire to love and care for those children. I want to thank them for what they do. This is a difficult time for those workers as well, given everything that has been reported, the added pressure and the concerns no doubt being expressed by parents as a result of much media reporting. This should go some way to assisting them in knowing that we have their back too.
    • The legislation that we have before us, which the government brought in as a matter of urgency -- and, as I've indicated, the opposition will support it -- achieves three objectives. It prioritises quality and safety considerations when assessing whether providers can receive the Commonwealth's childcare subsidy. It expands the powers for the Secretary of the Department of Education to publicise actions taken against providers who are in breach of those standards. Finally, it enables authorised officers of the department to conduct unannounced service visits and spot checks. All of these measures are important. Perhaps it is odd that, at the moment, quality and safety aren't considerations for the department. I suppose part of the reason for that is that state and territory governments, which have a very important role to play here, are the primary form of regulation, or the regulatory authority, when it comes to the operation of childcare centres and their services across the country.
    • It is important that we don't end up with a duplicate of the services or the regulation provided by either level of government. That is not what this is about. But adding those two considerations in to the department's consideration is a very important addition when it comes to the suite of tools that should be available to governments -- plural -- to deal with centres that are not achieving the standards that we, as a country, on behalf of parents, believe should be reached by centres.
    • If centres are not providing a quality service, a safe service, then we should be able to withdraw from them taxpayer funds that are provided to them to offer the service to the community. I think it will be quite an incentive to ensure that standards are met, to have that withdrawal made if a centre continues to breach standards.
    • Being able to be transparent about what is happening in a centre is also important -- informing parents about conditions or breaches or any sanction that has been put in place in relation to a centre. This new power the secretary will have is, similarly, very important. As a parent of three boys myself, if I were putting them into an institution, a childcare centre, I would want to know if there were certain conditions -- or, indeed, any sanctions -- being placed on that centre.
    • The ability for authorised officers to enter a childcare service without warning, without the need for a warrant or the need to be accompanied by the AFP, is also important. We have heard stories where, when an authorised officer pre-organises to go and visit a centre at a set point in time in the future, childcare workers will, at their employer's request, commence a working bee, perhaps over a weekend, to bring things up to standard so that, when the authorised officers turn up on site, all of the problems have miraculously disappeared. I think that has made a mockery of our ability to make sure that standards are being met, and I don't think there's a parent out there that has a child in care that would think this measure is in any way too draconian.
    • But the reality is that, while these laws and the proposal we have before us are good and things we endorse and support, they go only so far. The reality is that Commonwealth powers, when it comes to the childcare sector, start and end, in effect, with the administration of the National Quality Standard and, of course, of the childcare support payment. That is the limited power we have, as a Commonwealth, to deal with these issues.
    • The rest of the responsibility lies with state and territory governments. Once these laws do ultimately pass this parliament -- and I'm pleased that they will pass without any issue -- it will then be for state and territory ministers to deal with some of the issues they are now confronted with. There are issues that cannot be canvassed or covered by federal legislation that we do need to ensure are taken care of. We've heard talk of a range of matters which cover portfolios of education and child protection, but also state and territory attorneys-general. And, while it's difficult to bring all of those things together, I think it is essential. So it is incumbent upon this government, the Commonwealth government, to bring those state and territory ministers, and the various portfolios they exist in, together, to urgently progress the reforms that are needed to address all of the gaps, the cracks and the problems we have remaining in our childcare sector, to ensure that we never again see the proliferation of child exploitation activity -- of harm coming to children in our childcare sector. It is, as I say, urgent that they get on with that.
    • Some of those measures will include addressing matters related to the working-with-children check. The fact that we have a fragmented working-with-children-check system in this country, state by state or territory by territory, where there is no communication between the jurisdictions' databases, is, I think, a major failing. Indeed, it is something that was picked up in the royal commission, many years ago -- a decade ago. And that was a time when we were in government. I've made it very clear on the public record a number of times now that this is not a political issue, this is not a blame game and this is not about looking back and seeing who stuffed up when. We have a problem now that needs resolving now, which is why the opposition offered bipartisan support to resolve these matters urgently. Again, that offer of bipartisanship will be extended to ensuring that state and territory ministers are brought together to deal with all of the remaining issues that need to be dealt with.
    • Additionally, on working with children checks, the fact is that these forms of information really only become valuable or kick into gear when someone commits a crime and is convicted as a result of an investigation. Then that person loses their working with children authorisation. As we know, with some of the events that occurred in Victoria -- the allegations that have been aired and the charges that have been laid -- the individual concerned in this situation had a working with children check, because the criminal investigation side of things was not enacted. There was not a series of events that would have led to these things being picked up through the system that we currently have deployed in this country.
    • Similarly -- and I acknowledge that the government does intend to ensure that this is progressed through cooperation between Commonwealth and state and territory governments -- we need a system of registration for childcare workers across the country. I hope we will see the deployment of real-time information about workers and the history they have in their former places of employment available to future employers. If someone leaves Queensland and goes to take up a position of employment in Tasmania or Victoria or wherever it might be, I think it should be more than possible for that employee to have information available about them so that an employer knows who it is they are employing, what type of employee they are, whether complaints were made, whether complaints were substantiated and what action was taken. Those things are an important part of any available history, especially in an industry which is highly regulated for good reason. Clearly, this information-sharing gap has led to problems.
    • Similarly, the deployment of CCTV in childcare centres is something that needs addressing. I know there are community concerns out there around privacy both for workers and, importantly, for children. I think there are ways of being able to safeguard systems that provide security and safety for children in childcare settings but that enable the deployment of this important measure around CCTV. I was surprised to learn that it wasn't mandatory. In my own personal experience, more than a decade ago, I saw childcare centres with CCTV systems and just assumed it was mandatory. But to learn that across the country there are different arrangements in place highlights how, sadly, perpetrators of some of these horrendous acts unto our most vulnerable have been able to get away with what they have got away with.
    • There is a lot of work to do, and we cannot, with the passage of this legislation, say 'job done'. I know the government does not think that. We certainly do not as an opposition. We are now saying that, once these laws pass, it is absolutely essential that the Commonwealth bring together state and territory ministers to finish the job and to do what needs to be done. There have been too many incidents that have caused too much harm to young people and their families -- some of the heartbreaking stories I've read in recent days about events in centres. These are events that will change the lives of those young people and their families forever. Collectively, it is a failure on our part -- all of us, over time, who have not done what needs to be done to ensure that we stop these bad people from doing what they have done.
    • I commend the government for acting so quickly to get this done. I again thank the minister for the briefings and the departmental officials who've worked so hard to put in place what we're now seeking to pass through this place. But, again, it is only a small part of the solution required, and I do hope that state and territory ministers, in the various portfolios that will have responsibilities here, get their skates on and do what needs to be done. It is up to the Commonwealth to ensure that these reforms progress, and it's something we will be keeping a close eye on. But we do that, again, in the spirit of bipartisanship, because it is essential that we get this right. If we're talking about these sorts of things happening again -- in a year's time or in six months time or whenever it might be -- then we have failed, and we cannot afford to do that.
    • For the young people whose lives have been absolutely devastated by this, and their families -- my heart goes out to them. We owe it to them, so I commend this bill to the Senate and thank the government for their work.
  • Carol Brown, Tasmania, ALP, 18:50 8 min [10]
    • Tasmania 18:50 () (): I'm pleased to rise to speak on the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025. This is an important piece of legislation. Every parent should feel confident that, when they drop their child off at an early learning centre, they are leaving them in a place that is safe, high quality and well run. I know that, when my children went to early learning centres, that's what I assumed I was dropping them off to -- a place that was safe, high quality and well run.
    • Sadly, recent events -- horrendous acts -- have shaken that confidence. In Victoria, families have been left traumatised after the arrest of an individual facing serious charges involving children at multiple early learning centres. Thousands of parents are now dealing with the fear that their child may be harmed in a place that was meant to protect them.
    • This bill is part of our government's response. It strengthens the Commonwealth's role in ensuring safety and quality in early childhood education and care. Most early learning providers across Australia, as we've heard the shadow minister say in his contribution, do the right thing. They work hard every day to give children the best start in life. But we've seen what happens when a small number of services repeatedly fail to meet the standard. This bill gives the Commonwealth power to act when services fall short -- not just after harm is done, but before it happens. It's about using the biggest lever we have, the childcare subsidy, to lift standards, not just respond to problems.
    • At its core, the bill does four key things. First, it puts quality and safety at the centre of provider approvals. If a provider has a poor track record, they can be refused approval or stopped from expanding. Second, it strengthens the department's compliance powers, including the power to suspend or cancel approvals where standards aren't met. Third, it increases transparency, allowing the department to publish more information about enforcement actions. And, finally, it gives Commonwealth officers the power to carry out unannounced spot checks, just like state regulators already do.
    • These are commonsense reforms, and they are needed. The Commonwealth does not license or regulate childcare centres -- that's a job for the states and territories -- but we do fund the system. The Commonwealth provides around $16 billion a year in childcare subsidy payments. That funding covers about 70 per cent of the cost of running a typical service. That gives us a powerful responsibility to ensure public funding is tied to high standards.
    • This legislation gives the secretary of the department the ability to consider a provider's full record -- including serious incidents, complaints and prior compliance breaches -- when deciding whether they should receive public funding. It also allows for notices to be issued, for conditions placed on approvals and, in serious cases, for approval to be withdrawn altogether. Providers will still have the chance to respond. This is not about unfairly penalising services; it is about setting a clear expectation. If you don't provide safe, high-quality care, you can't expect public support.
    • The bill also expands the enforcement register. This means parents will be able to see if a provider has been refused a new service, issued an infringement notice or had conditions placed on their operations. That transparency matters. Choosing a childcare service is one of the most important decisions a family makes. Parents deserve access to clear, timely information. These reforms also extend to family daycare centres and in-home care, where oversight can be more difficult. From January, providers in these settings will be required to collect gap fees directly from families. This will reduce fraud and simplify administration.
    • The bill also streamlines how compliance officers operate, especially in regional and remote areas, and allows quicker auditing of large providers when concerns arise. We are also working on a stronger national oversight, including better tracking of educators' histories across the services. We are supporting improvements to working-with-children checks and continuing to invest in educator training and professional development. There is no single solution to keeping children safe in early learning, but this bill is a major step forward, and doing nothing is not an option. For the good providers already doing the right thing, this bill creates a more level playing field. For families, it helps to restore trust that early learning is safe and properly monitored.
    • This reform has been developed in consultation with the sector. The government has worked closely with state and territory regulators and with key stakeholders, including Family Day Care Australia and the Australian Home Childcare Association. Their feedback helped shape the bill and ensure the measures are practical and supported. This work continues Labor's longstanding commitment to early childhood education. Every child deserves the best start, and every parent deserves confidence in the system. We are also working with state and territory governments on a strong and significant package of reforms. As was acknowledged by Senator Duniam in his contribution, the Commonwealth has limited powers. State and territory governments also need to deal with the issues that we are being confronted with. We need to work together.
    • As the education minister has said, the goal is to give every educator and provider the tools to help keep children safe and to give parents peace of mind. These are the next steps in building a stronger, safer early education system, and this bill is the foundation.
  • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 18:58 14 min [25]
    • Victoria 18:58 () (): I rise to speak in support of the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025. Every child deserves a safe, high-quality early education. Wherever public money is spent, we must have strong, transparent mechanisms to ensure accountability. This bill introduces measures the Greens support, but, let's be clear, it will not fix a system where too many children and families are being let down.
    • We have all seen the tragic reports in recent months of stories that are hard to read and harder to forget -- allegations of abuse, neglect and malpractice in early learning settings, including horrifying reports just this week in Queensland and last month in my home state of Victoria. We have seen the bravery of whistleblowers and journalists, the tireless work of educators and the grief and anger of families who trusted a system that failed them. The truth, as we all know, is that these are not isolated incidents. They expose deeper, systemic failures. They confirm what many in the sector and many parents already know, that our current model is ill equipped to ensure consistently high-quality, safe early education for our children. That's an indictment on all of us. It should never take tragedy to trigger reform.
    • So, yes, we do support this bill, but let's be honest: it is not a silver bullet. It's a small step in the right direction, but it is far from sufficient. Tinkering with the subsidy system won't keep children safe. Right now, around 11 per cent of long day care centres are rated as working towards national quality standards, so they haven't met them. That's over 1,000 services operating and receiving taxpayer subsidies despite not meeting basic benchmarks in education, health, safety and wellbeing. That's not good enough. Australia has world-class national quality standards on paper, but standards alone mean little without enforcement. They need to be backed properly by funded regulators, clear accountability and real consequences when things go wrong. Instead, we rely on underresourced state and territory regulators to do the heavy lifting. These agencies are stretched thin. One in 10 services still don't even have a quality rating. Complaints go unresolved. Children's safety is repeatedly put at risk.
    • Independent analysis of this bill's measures highlights that underfunded regulators, combined with long delays in quality assessments, may limit the bill's effectiveness. While this bill strengthens enforcement powers, it doesn't guarantee improved safety or quality. It does not lift standards across the board. That's because the deeper issues lie in the funding model itself, a model that treats early education as an industry to profiteer off, not a human right. We have a system where the childcare subsidy actively incentivises putting profit over quality care, while failing to guarantee safety or high standards, failing to guarantee access, failing to guarantee inclusion and failing to guarantee fair conditions for educators. Just last week, we drove past a for-profit centre called Little Assets. Can you get more blatant than that?
    • The childcare subsidy funnels billions in public money -- $16 billion this year -- into a sector dominated by for-profit providers, including multinational ASX listed corporations. In the past decade, 95 per cent of new providers entering the system have been for profit, and this is our children's early education we're speaking about. As a result, money meant for children's education and care is leaking out of the system into shareholder profits, including offshore. To quote Catherine Liddle, CEO of SNAICC, the national voice for First Nations children:
    • ... we can't ensure that safety until the underlying systemic issues impacting Australia's early learning and care sector are properly addressed.
    • Australia's current Child Care Subsidy funding model has contributed to a profit-driven environment, where some providers are able to put financial gain ahead of the wellbeing of children.
    • Unless we fundamentally shift the way early education is funded and supported, we will continue to see safety and quality issues arise.
    • The data backs her up. For-profit providers consistently underperform on quality. Just 13 per cent exceed the national quality standards, compared to 28 per cent of not-for-profit services.
    • As the Greens spokesperson for early childhood education and care and as a mum of a two-year-old, I hear time and time again from families about the deep trust they place in their local community or not-for-profit centres. I'm fortunate to send my daughter to a fabulous council run service. But access to high-quality, safe, not-for-profit early education shouldn't be a privilege; it's a right. One constituent was brought to tears by the mere possibility that their beloved community centre would be taken over by a private provider. These centres become part of the village to help raise our children. They are trusted, they are embedded and they are irreplaceable. Yet we're seeing these services frozen out and pushed aside by a system that favours profit over people.
    • That's why I've proudly stood with families in Victoria to defend community run centres: in Windsor, to save the incredible Windsor Community Children's Centre, and in Footscray, to celebrate the Bulldogs Community Children's Centre remaining in community hands, where it belongs. These services show what's possible when care comes first, when there's no incentive to cut corners and no shareholders -- only educators, family and children.
    • But quality and safety aren't the only challenges we face. To build a world-class early learning system, we must address the workforce crisis, fix access and make genuinely affordable care a priority. Educators, the absolute backbone of the system, are being pushed to breaking point. Research shows that they work on average an additional nine hours of unpaid labour every single week, on top of already low wages, high turnover and chronic understaffing. We ask these professionals to perform the most important work possible, yet we don't pay them properly, we don't value them and we don't resource them, and it's no wonder that they are leaving this sector in droves and, of course, that quality is slipping. Families are also under pressure. Over 35 per cent of Australians live in childcare deserts, areas where fewer than one place is available for every three children requiring care. These disproportionately affect rural and regional areas, First Nations communities and lower income families. For many families, costs remain a huge barrier, and families are spending on average $140 a week out of pocket on early childhood education and care, and this is often much higher. For single parents, families with multiple children or those grappling with housing, these costs can be prohibitive to their children having those crucial early-years education. Parents are forced to make impossible choices about whether they return to work, take up training opportunities or put their careers on hold. For those who want to make the decision to stay home with their kids, that's great. But some women, parents and families don't want that; they would like the choice and they deserve the choice.
    • This isn't just a family issue; it's an economic one. The Australia Institute estimates that fixing early education could deliver a whopping $168 billion back to our economy. Most importantly, this is about our children. Missing out on early learning means missing out on vital social, emotional and cognitive development that lays the foundation for everything that follows. Ninety per cent of the brain develops before a child turns five years old. We guarantee access to primary school; why not guarantee access to those crucial early-years education, especially now when experts warn that NAPLAN results show one-third of students aren't meeting expectations in literacy or numeracy? Labor's three-day guarantee act was a step forward in recognising early learning as more than child minding. It's education. It's a human right. But let's be clear; we do not yet have a functioning early learning system, and tinkering at the edges simply won't fix it.
    • The Greens believe it's time to rethink early education and care from the ground up. At the last election, we proposed a bold plan for universal, high-quality education and care just like primary and secondary school. Our plan would replace the broken CCS with direct public funding. It would give government more control over quality and access. It would guarantee funding for Aboriginal community controlled organisations, better support for children with additional needs and fair pay for our educators. Crucially, it would establish a new early childhood education and care commission. This commission would act as a national watchdog. It would have real powers to oversee quality, safety, access, workforce conditions and funding. It would ensure that public money is well spent and that services are accountable, not just punished after the fact, as this bill proposes. It would provide the leadership that this sector so desperately needs, because right now that leadership does not exist in this place. State regulators are under strain, and peak bodies and advocates are filling the gaps, but there is no central independent steward for one of our most essential public services. Passing the buck between the states and feds is failing our children. This commission would be the brain and backbone of the early learning system. It would coordinate reform, enhance standards and hold providers accountable for public money.
    • The Parenthood, a powerful voice for families, has endorsed this proposal. So too has Royal Far West and national charities supporting rural and remote children's health and wellbeing. Now, the ball is in the government's court. Are they willing to work with us on real reform and oversight of our federal early education system, or will they keep papering over the cracks of a broken system? How we treat our youngest generation says everything about who we are. If we can't prioritise their safety or guarantee their right to learn in these formative years, then what are we here for? Early learning can be the great equaliser, but only if it's truly accessible, high quality and truly universal, only if we stop treating it like a commodity and start treating it as a public good, and only if we put children and educators ahead of profit.
    • So, yes, we support this bill. No service that consistently fails quality standards should continue to receive public funds, but that should be the absolute baseline. This bill is a bandaid. It's not a plan, and it's not a vision. We need more than reactive tools to act after harm occurs. We need leadership to prevent harm from occurring in the first place. The Prime Minister has said -- and we welcome this -- that he wants the universal provision of affordable child care to be the political achievement that he's most remembered for. Well, is he ready to deliver that legacy?
    • The Greens are ready to work constructively with the government. Between us, we have the numbers to get stuff done. There's nothing standing in the way other than political will. And we don't underestimate the task at hand. We know it's a big job, but we're up to it. We have to be for our children's sake. It's because of this that I'll be moving the Greens second reading amendment standing in my name to note the need for broader reform to make early childhood education and care universal and high quality. And we will call on the government to establish an independent early childhood education and care commission that has regulatory powers to monitor and enforce compliance with the national quality standards. It's tasked with leading national coordination and driving sector-wide reform, and it's responsible for overseeing the long-term transition to a free, universal and high-quality early learning system.
    • Our children deserve better than patchwork solutions. They deserve a system built around their needs, not for corporate profits. Let's build something better, something lasting, because our kids and the communities that are raising them are depending on us to act. As Georgie Dent from the Parenthood so powerfully said, 'This is a moment to act, not just to react.' Let this be the moment we choose action, the moment we commit to building a system that puts children first, values educators and restores trust for every family in every community across this country.
    • I move:
    • At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:
    • (a) notes the need for broader reform to make early childhood education and care universal and high-quality; and
    • (b) calls on the Government to establish an independent national Early Childhood Education and Care Commission, which should:
    • (i) have regulatory powers to monitor and enforce compliance with the National Quality Standards,
    • (ii) be tasked with leading national coordination and sector-wide reform, and
    • (iii) drive the long-term transition to a free, universal, and high-quality early education system".
  • Leah Blyth, South Australia, LP, 19:12 7 min [9]
    • South Australia Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 19:12 ( -- ) (): I too would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague Senator Duniam. The coalition will be supporting the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025. And I think it's fair to say that this chamber is united in wanting to make sure that we are protecting the rights of children within our country. The horrifying reports of the alleged widespread abuse in the Australian childcare centres have rightly shocked the nation. As a mother, my heart absolutely goes out to all of the families that have been impacted. We are unwavering in our support for changes which better protect children in care settings and give confidence to the millions of families that rely on child care. For any parent, the safety and wellbeing of their children are paramount. When that trust is broken, the consequences are devastating for families and corrosive to society's confidence in institutions that are meant to protect and care for our most vulnerable.
    • In the wake of such revelations, it is natural to hear calls for more government action, more regulation, more oversight and more checks, but too often government responses are designed to demonstrate activity rather than deliver genuine solutions. When government solves one problem, it often creates two more in its place. Proposals such as mandating child welfare officers in every centre or expanding already burdensome background checks may sound reassuring, but they risk piling more bureaucracy on an already strained system, driving up the cost of child care and making it even harder for families to access affordable services, though I understand in this case there is a need for action.
    • The main levers to improve the safety of early learning centres for children are actually outside of the Commonwealth's legislative powers. They fall predominantly to the states and territories, who are responsible for the regulation of these services, and, as identified in the New South Wales Wheeler report, there is much more that state and territory regulators can and should do.
    • I would like to see measures to ensure centres aren't bogged down with paperwork and paralysed by compliance. I think it's important to note that, in this, we need to ensure that good people -- passionate people dedicated to the care of our children -- are still attracted to work in this vital industry. They are the very people we need, to keep our children safe.
    • We shouldn't be complacent and pretend that more federal, state or territory regulation somehow makes criminal behaviour less likely. We already have laws; every state and territory government has the legislative power to pursue and prosecute criminal conduct in early childhood settings. There is no one simple solution to keeping children safe, but I think it is fair to note that no amount of red tape can stop someone who is determined to do harm. We saw that in Queensland, in New South Wales and, most recently, in Victoria.
    • In December 2023, the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority published a review of child safety arrangements under the National Quality Framework. The government has had the regulator's review of child safety arrangements for more than 18 months. The Albanese government has been slow to act on the 16 recommendations. It has taken almost two years for the government to enact the simple change to the reporting requirements for physical and sexual abuse, from seven days to 24 hours, and it will come into force on 1 September this year. As Jason Clare said, those changes should have been implemented yesterday.
    • But you can't regulate morality, you can't legislate decency, and you certainly can't bureaucrat your way out of evil. The priority here is, absolutely, foremost, keeping our children safe. But I think it is time to think beyond the immediate fix. It's time to empower families. We should be supporting parents in making the choice that works best for them, whether that means returning to work and using a childcare centre or staying at home to care for their own children. It might even be using a relative or loved one to care for their children.
    • We should stop forcing families into rigid, one-size-fits-all systems and recognise the value of informal care, particularly that of grandparents, aunties, uncles, neighbours and members of the community -- the people who already love and know these children. It is incumbent on all of us here to build a system that gives parents the financial freedom and the flexibility to choose what is right for their children and their families. For many families, especially in culturally diverse communities, informal family based care isn't a fallback; it's the norm. And our system should support, not penalise, that choice. If we truly want to keep our children safe -- and I believe that everyone in this place does -- then let's focus on strengthening families, not just growing government. Let's give families the tools, the trust and the freedom to raise their children in a way that suits them best.
    • This bill is well intentioned, but intention is not the same as impact. The coalition supports this bill, but real safety, real reform and real support for Australian families will not come from this bill alone. It will come when we stop reaching for more regulation and start reaching for common sense and policies that empower and give families the freedom to choose what works best for them.
  • Corinne Mulholland, Queensland, ALP, 19:19 3 min [6]
    • Queensland 19:19 () (): Next month, like thousands of Australian families, I will take my young son to child care for the first time. I do so with a mix of excitement, for the wonderful child development opportunities that await my young son, and of deep sadness, over the horrific child abuse allegations that we have seen uncovered across Australia. I know in my heart that these perpetrators of abuse are not representative of the thousands of incredible educators who commit their lives to loving and guiding our littlest people through their most important years.
    • I also want to acknowledge that our educators are hurting too. My heart goes out to the early education sector, which is filled with good, decent and loving educators. They are upset and they are angry, just like us. But tonight we take action. On behalf of more than one million Australians with children in child care, I say thank you to the Prime Minister for his swift action. I also say thank you to the Minister for Education, Jason Clare, and the Minister for Early Childhood Education, Senator Jess Walsh. Ministers Clare and Walsh have stepped up to this moment without hesitation. They have confronted this moment without excuses and sought to fast-track these amendments as urgently as Australian parents would expect them to.
    • This bill, the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025, provides levers to drive real and meaningful change. Seventy per cent of the running costs for early education centres are provided for from the Commonwealth childcare subsidy. This bill gives the Commonwealth the power to immediately cut off the childcare subsidy for centres falling below the standard, or even for one single safety breach. The states and territories remain the regulators for centres, responsible for regulating safety and quality across centres in their jurisdiction.
    • This bill also expands powers for on-the-spot inspections without warrants or police accompaniment to investigate fraud, misconduct and noncompliance. A national register for childcare workers will be established to track the employment history of workers, to prevent them moving between centres undetected, looking for red flags and taking swift action.
    • I wish to acknowledge that there is further policy work underway, including mandatory child safety training for all workers to identify potential grooming behaviour and the abuse of children. I also acknowledge that there are trials underway on the use of CCTV, to carefully consider the use of this technology to deter offenders but, most importantly, to protect privacy.
    • I support this bill, and I call on all states and territories to continue to work with the Commonwealth to take strong action to enhance safety and quality in our early education centres.
  • Maria Kovacic, New South Wales, LP, 19:22 [9]
    • New South Wales 19:22 () (): The coalition will support the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025. As the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Sussan Ley, has said, child safety is above politics. We are unwavering in our support for changes which better protect children in childcare settings and that give confidence to the one million families that rely on child care. The early learning workforce is a critical and valued workforce, and we acknowledge the work that they do. This bill only goes so far, and we are calling on the Albanese government to exercise leadership with states and territories to progress other measures swiftly. They need to engage the states and territories to do the things that they need to do to ensure that changes are made.
    • The bill amends the family assistance law to do three things. Firstly, it allows the secretary to financially penalise providers through suspension or cancellation of the childcare subsidy. Secondly, it effectively allows stronger name-and-shame powers, especially on the Starting Blocks website, by expanding the secretary's powers to publicise details about providers. Thirdly, it enables authorised officers to conduct unannounced visits to services, noting this duplicates existing powers of state and territory regulators.
    • But this bill goes only so far to shifting the dial when it comes to making childcare centres safer. The main levers to improve the safety of early learning centres for children are outside of the Commonwealth's legislative powers; they sit with the states and territories, who are responsible for the regulation of these services. As identified in the New South Wales Wheeler report, there is much more that state and territory regulators can and should do. This is their remit. It is their responsibility to do this, and the Commonwealth should compel them to do so, but that doesn't absolve the Commonwealth of its responsibilities.
    • This is why we call on the government to work with the states and territories to do three things urgently: firstly, implement a national approach to working-with-children checks; secondly, implement a national register of workers; and, thirdly, implement a mobile phone ban. The National Model Code for Taking Images or Videos of Children while Providing Early Childhood Education and Care developed by the national regulator is currently voluntary. We also support stronger targets for regulator activity and joint efforts to implement appropriate use of CCTV, which the Wheeler report recommended should be mandatory for new childcare services in the first instance.
    • Devastatingly, the recent allegations in Victoria are not the first of their kind in childcare settings. In August 2023, as a result of Operation Tenterfield, a Queensland man was charged and later convicted of 1,623 child abuse offences against 91 children in Brisbane, Sydney and overseas between 2007 and 2022. We have failed our children. The fact that this has happened and continues to happen clearly states that we have failed our children.
    • In December 2023, the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority published their Review of Child Safety Arrangements under the National Quality Framework. The government has had the regulator's review of child safety arrangements for more than 18 months. The Albanese government has been slow to act on the 16 recommendations. It has taken almost two years for the government to simply enact the change in reporting physical and sexual abuse from seven days to 24 hours. That shouldn't take that long. It really shouldn't take that long. But that change will only come into effect on 1 September 2025. As Jason Clare said, those changes should have been implemented yesterday. We shouldn't have been so slow to act.
    • After accepting in principle the key recommendations from the review of child safety arrangements in February 2022, education ministers did not meet for a year between June 2024 and June 2025. For an entire year from when recommendations were provided, there was no meeting of education ministers. It begs the question of why that was the case. That is far too long, given the gravity of the problem at hand and the risk to our children. We acknowledge that governments of all stripes have not fully enacted all recommendations from reports, including the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, fast enough.
    • That includes the harmonisation of the working-with-children check system. This has long been something that governments have pursued but never achieved, and this is long overdue. The current system is deficient and does not meet the standards that Australians expect. It does not meet the standards that parents expect, and it does not meet the standards that our children deserve. There is no standardisation. Each state and territory has its own scheme. The check should be set at the most stringent in our country -- absolutely the most stringent. Some inherent risk remains. This is because it only relies on an individual's criminal history as a check to see if a worker may be a risk to children. This is obviously not good enough, as people that do pose risks may not yet have been convicted.
    • Debate interrupted.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Second Reading
    • Speaker Count: 7
    • Speakers: Tim Ayres (ALP); Jonathon Duniam (LP); Carol Brown (ALP); Steph Hodgins-May (AG); Leah Blyth (LP); Corinne Mulholland (ALP); Maria Kovacic (LP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Tim Ayres (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "There is a lot more. After Ashley Paul Griffith was arrested and charged in Queensland with multiple child sex offences, Education Ministers across the country commissioned the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority -- ACECQA -- to conduct a Child Safety Review."; Tim Ayres (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "Education Ministers have agreed in principle to the key recommendations of that review."; Tim Ayres (ALP): data with source signal: "It also means mandatory child safety training to support the 99.9 per cent of educators who care for our children every single day and do a fantastic job, to help them to recognise people who are up to no good. After 4 Corners exposed appalling examples of abuse and neglect on 17 March this year, the New South Wales Government commissioned Chris Wheeler, a former Deputy New South Wales Ombudsman, to undertake an independent review of the New South Wales Early Childhood Education and Care Regulatory Authority."; Steph Hodgins-May (AG): data with source signal: "This isn't just a family issue; it's an economic one. The Australia Institute estimates that fixing early education could deliver a whopping $168 billion back to our economy."; Leah Blyth (LP): source-backed reasoning: "We saw that in Queensland, in New South Wales and, most recently, in Victoria. In December 2023, the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority published a review of child safety arrangements under the National Quality Framework."; Leah Blyth (LP): source-backed reasoning: "The government has had the regulator's review of child safety arrangements for more than 18 months."; Leah Blyth (LP): data with source signal: "The Albanese government has been slow to act on the 16 recommendations."; Maria Kovacic (LP): source-backed reasoning: "The National Model Code for Taking Images or Videos of Children while Providing Early Childhood Education and Care developed by the national regulator is currently voluntary. We also support stronger targets for regulator activity and joint efforts to implement appropriate use of CCTV, which the Wheeler report recommended should be mandatory for new childcare services in the first instance."; Maria Kovacic (LP): source-backed reasoning: "The fact that this has happened and continues to happen clearly states that we have failed our children. In December 2023, the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority published their Review of Child Safety Arrangements under the National Quality Framework."; Maria Kovacic (LP): source-backed reasoning: "The government has had the regulator's review of child safety arrangements for more than 18 months."
    • Speaker Response Positives: Carol Brown (ALP): responded to Jonathon Duniam (LP): "As was acknowledged by Senator Duniam in his contribution, the Commonwealth has limited powers."; Leah Blyth (LP): responded to Jonathon Duniam (LP): "South Australia Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate 19:12 ( -- ) (): I too would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague Senator Duniam."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Victoria 19:30 () (): I rise tonight, honoured and humbled, to pay tribute to a remarkable man. He was a man who was a member of Victoria's legal profession, he was a dedicated supporter of the Vietnamese community, and he was a dear friend. His name was Mr Ramon Frederico. His passing on 12 May this year coincided, poignantly, with the 50th anniversary of Vietnamese settlement in Australia, an occasion that reminds us of all of those who played a pivotal role in supporting refugees and shaping our multicultural society. 5 min
• Ramon's connection with the Vietnamese community began in the late 1970s, just shortly after the first wave of Vietnamese refugees arrived in Australia under Liberal prime minister Malcolm Fraser -- a very brave policy decision that that Liberal prime minister took at the time. These refugees faced immense challenges, including language barriers, cultural differences, uncertainty about housing and employment, and the very real fear, of all refugees, of starting over in a new land and an unfamiliar place. Local communities, too, understandably had concerns about this sudden influx of new arrivals, and it was the work of people just like Ramon Frederico that helped ease those tensions and foster understandings between communities.
• He was a lawyer. He was practising in Richmond in Victoria at the time. He was uniquely placed then to provide legal support and advice to many of those early Vietnamese refugees who had limited English proficiency and very few resources. His efforts were complemented by collaborations with dedicated bilingual community leaders and professionals. Together they laid the foundation for vital support networks that would assist thousands of Vietnamese refugees in Victoria.
• But Ramon's work extended beyond simple legal advice. He advocated. He advocated tirelessly with government agencies on behalf of refugees and their families, and he often helped arrange family sponsorships for those who were waiting in refugee camps across South Asia, ensuring that many were eventually reunited with their loved ones here in Australia. He also worked with the Victorian government to secure important concessions that allowed Vietnamese traders to operate on weekends. Now, this seemingly small change had a profound impact on the community's economic stability. It enabled many families to thrive while accommodating their work schedules.
• Ramon Frederico's commitment to community went beyond that legal support and beyond that economic support. He also played a vital role in cultural preservation and community cohesion. He was instrumental in organising the first outdoor Lunar New Year, or Tet festival. He held it at Burnley Oval in Richmond -- an event that's now a cherished annual celebration of Vietnamese culture in Australia. He supported youth programs and drop-in centres for unsupervised Vietnamese teenagers, and this cultural landmark also transformed into the Vietnamese restaurant on Victoria Street, Richmond, generating funds to support youth initiatives.
• Despite this -- and you probably guessed from his name -- Ramon Frederico was not of Vietnamese background himself, but he was one of the few non-Vietnamese individuals to serve on the executive committee of the Vietnamese community. His advocacy and involvement bridged cultures. He created understandings and friendships between the Vietnamese community and the broader Australian society. I personally have met so many people in the Vietnamese community in Melbourne, in Victoria, just through knowing Ramon, because he made such deep and lasting and abiding friendships there.
• His commitment to justice extended internationally. He did try to represent a Vietnamese human rights activist who was imprisoned for political reasons. His visa application was rejected by the Vietnamese government, but it symbolised his unwavering dedication to human rights and justice for all. Throughout his life, he encouraged the Vietnamese community to engage with mainstream political processes.
• He was an extraordinary man. Beyond his professional life, he was known for his generosity and kindness to his family and friends and for his steadfast support for local businesses, particularly in Richmond and Footscray, and so many benefited from his wise counsel and encouragement. His approach to politics was marked by pragmatism, inclusiveness and a focus on serving his community. His legacy is one of bridging divides between cultures, generations and political views. He will be sorely missed. Vale, Ramon Frederico.
• Senate adjourned at 19:35

• Analysis Fragment
• Exchange Subject: 2025-07-30 Senate Parliament 3
• Speaker Count: 6
• Speakers: Business / Consideration Of Legislation / Katy Gallagher (ALP); Questions Without Notice: Additional Answers / Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme / Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP); Notices / Postponement / Lidia Thorpe (IND); Documents / Department Of Employment And Workplace Relations / Order For The Production Of Documents / Penny Allman-Payne (AG); Notices / Presentation / Wendy Askew (LP); Adjournment / Frederico (LP)
• Rational Thought Positives: Questions Without Notice: Additional Answers / Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme / Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Australians 15:02 ( -- ) (): I would like to answer a question by Senator Tyrrell. The independent review of the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme will seek to ensure the scheme is fit for purpose and delivers for Tasmanians into the future."; Questions Without Notice: Additional Answers / Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme / Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "Commissioning an independent review was a key recommendation of last year's Senate select committee inquiry."; Questions Without Notice: Additional Answers / Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme / Malarndirri McCarthy (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "The review will consider the committee's further recommendations, including the Bass Strait Passenger Vehicle Equalisation Scheme and how to modernise the system to ensure it best serves Tasmanians, including reducing administrative burden for more efficient shipping."; Notices / Presentation / Wendy Askew (LP): data with source signal: "Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 16:34 ( -- ) (): by leave -- At the request of Senator Ruston, I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, she will move: That the Senate -- (a) notes that the Prime Minister promised 71 times to Australians that 'all you need is your Medicare card, not a credit card' and that it would be 'free to see a GP'; (b) notes that, despite the Prime Minister's promise, according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare: (i) while the Prime Minister was busy waving around his Medicare card claiming it is all you need to see a doctor, Australians have forked out almost $2 billion to see a GP in the past year, (ii) in May 2025 alone, during the election campaign, Australians paid a staggering $166 million in combined out-of-pocket costs, and (iii) Australians need their credit cards more and more, as well as their Medicare card, to see a GP under Labor; (c) condemns the Prime Minister for not being truthful with Australians during the Federal Election campaign; and (d) calls on the Prime Minister to admit that he misled Australians about Medicare."
• Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Thursday, 31 July 2025
• The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sue Lines ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

• The Clerk: I table documents pursuant to statute as listed on the Dynamic Red.
• Full details of the documents are recorded in the . Journals of the Senate

• The Clerk: Proposals to meet have been lodged as follows:
• Community Affairs Legislation Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 4 pm.
• Environment and Communications Legislation and References Committees -- private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 12.45 pm.
• Human Rights -- Joint Statutory Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 10.30 am.
• Law Enforcement -- Joint Statutory Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 10 am.
• Migration -- Joint Standing Committee -- private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 12.15 pm.
• Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 09:01 [1]
  • 09:01 (): If there is no objection, the meetings are authorised.

• Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 09:01 1 min [1]
  • 09:01 (): The Senate will now consider a motion to be moved by Senator Thorpe. Before you move your motion, Senator Thorpe, may I remind you that it's fine to have a message stick in the Senate, but the procedure is that you advise me and the Deputy Clerk of your intention to bring a message stick into the chamber. Thank you.
• Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 09:02 5 min [22]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 09:02 ( -- ) (): Thank you, President. I move:
  • That the Senate --
  • (a) notes that on 27 May 2025, 24-year-old disabled Warlpiri-Luritja man Kumanjayi White died a tragic death under police restraint inside a supermarket in Mparntwe/Alice Springs;
  • (b) extends its deepest sympathies to the family of Kumanjayi White and the Yuendumu community;
  • (c) notes that 17 First Nations people have died in custody this year and extends its deepest sympathies to the families of these people;
  • (d) resolves that all parliamentarians will work constructively together to address the over-incarceration of First Nations people and deaths in custody; and
  • (e) calls on the Government to:
  • (i) support Kumanjayi White's family, and note their request for:
  • (A) the re-establishment of community-control and self-determination in the Northern Territory, and
  • (B) the reversal of interventionist policies introduced under the NT Intervention and subsequent Stronger Futures legislation 18 years ago;
  • (ii) ensure there is appropriate support for the impacted family, for sorry business and during the coronial inquest, and necessary legal support,
  • (iii) continue to work with states and territories to:
  • (A) implement recommendations from the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, and
  • (B) ensure appropriate conduct of investigations into First Nations deaths in custody and monitor progress of recommendations made to the Government relating to deaths in custody.
  • I have put forward this motion with the intention of bringing this chamber together on something that is very important to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and it should be very important for this nation. This isn't about politics or pointscoring; it's about compassion. It's about our shared duty as parliamentarians to ensure that justice and dignity are extended to all people on this continent.
  • On 27 May this year, during Reconciliation Week, 24-year-old Warlpiri man Kumanjayi White died under police restraint in a Coles supermarket. He was a young man with a disability. He was deeply loved. His death was preventable. This motion extends the Senate's deepest sympathies to his family, to the Yuendumu community, to the families of the 17 First Peoples who've died in custody this year and to the families of all those who have died since the 1991 royal commission. These are not just statistics; they are sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, cousins, siblings and grandchildren lost to a system that continues to harm our people.
  • Ned Hargraves, a senior Warlpiri elder and the grandfather of Kumanjayi White, spoke for many when he said: 'We are devastated by this death. My jaja was vulnerable and needed support, not to be criminalised because of his disability.' Ned has called for answers, respect and justice, not just for his family but for all families still waiting for change and for those who live in fear that their loved ones will be next.
  • This motion calls on the government to ensure the family is supported over the coming months, with assistance for sorry business, the coronial inquest and legal support. That is the very least we can do. But it also asks this parliament to do something bigger: to work together to end the crisis of deaths in custody and the overincarceration of First Peoples in this country. This is not a partisan issue or one for states and territories alone. It is a national responsibility -- a moral one. The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody in 1991 made clear what needs to be done, yet, decades later, those recommendations remain largely unimplemented and ignored. Meanwhile, families continue to bury their loved ones.
  • This motion is about committing to practical, overdue action, supported by evidence and backed by First Peoples. It calls for federal leadership that works with states and territories to ensure that every death in custody is properly investigated, that recommendations are tracked and implemented and that families are treated with respect and dignity.
  • I speak not only as a senator but as someone who has lived through this pain. My cousin Josh Kerr died in custody in 2022. I grew up with his mum, Donnis. She's family to me. She told me about saying, 'I love you,' for the last time while Josh was in shackles, about their last hug and about how the system took him from her, just like it had taken her from her own parents -- a cycle of grief that has never been broken. This is our reality.
  • This motion is about preventing the pain from continuing. It's about doing what we can here and now to ensure that Kumanjayi's death is not just another entry in a long and shameful list. It must be a turning point. I urge all senators and those in the other place to support this motion. Let us stand together. Choose justice and honour. Honour Kumanjayi White's memory by committing to real change.
  • When I first came into the Senate, I did bring in this message stick with 441 markings to mark 441 deaths in custody. Today we have 602 deaths in custody, after a royal commission. When will this end? This is our message to this parliament: stop killing us. Stop killing us.
• Murray Watt, Queensland, ALP, 09:07 5 min [7]
  • Queensland Minister for the Environment and Water 09:07 ( -- ) (): On behalf of the government I offer my condolences to the family of Kumanjayi White, who died in police custody in Alice Springs on 27 May this year. I acknowledge the distress felt by the community of Yuendumu, who know too well the loss of a young person in police custody. This continues to be a difficult time for many. I know that the Minister for Indigenous Australians, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, was in contact with the families of Yuendumu immediately after the tragedy. Her deep connection to remote communities in the Territory ensures their voices are carried not just into this chamber but to the cabinet table.
  • In the two months since the event, we have seen vigils held all over the country. Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians alike have stood together to demand better from all levels of government. In June, the minister took these calls to the Joint Council on Closing the Gap, where First Nations peak organisations and all Australian governments are represented. She's also working closely with the Attorney-General for plans to raise the issue at the Standing Council of Attorneys-General in August.
  • It is simply unacceptable that 602 First Nations people have died in custody since the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. The royal commission was clear that the best way to reduce First Nations deaths in custody is to reduce the high incarceration rate of First Nations people, including through social and economic responses, which the evidence shows can reduce crime, change the course of lives and avoid people coming into contact with the police or justice system in the first place.
  • This is what the Commonwealth government is focusing on, including through the National Agreement on Closing the Gap. We are investing in First Nations led justice reinvestment initiatives nationally. In the Northern Territory we're already seeing results. On Groote Eylandt there has been a huge decline in offending, with crime rates now at an all-time low. There were 130 offences recorded in the last 12 months, compared to more than 1,000 in 2019. We are supporting the Justice Policy Partnership to bring together all levels of government and peak organisations to improve justice outcomes for First Nations people. We are increasing investment under the National Access to Justice Partnership 2025-30 to ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples receive proper legal assistance. We need more action by states and territories to keep First Nations people out of justice systems and ensure they are safe when in custody; this is their responsibility in the federation. The Commonwealth will continue to use forums such as the Standing Council of Attorneys-General and the Police Ministers Council to work on reform.
  • The Australian government is investing in the areas that we know will help keep Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people out of the justice system, like housing, jobs, education and health. Closing the gap in these key areas, along with economic empowerment, is key to breaking cycles of incarceration and reincarceration. In the Northern Territory, over 220 houses were built in remote communities last year, and 206 houses were built in the previous year. On jobs, we are delivering the Remote Jobs and Economic Development program by creating 3,000 jobs in remote communities. We are training the next generation of First Nations health workers to create jobs, expand access to local services and deliver on our commitment to train 500 First Nations health workers. The Australian government is also doubling its investment in Northern Territory public schools over the next five years, meaning that all Northern Territory schools will be fully and fairly funded by 2029.
  • These investments are building the foundation that will help prevent people from coming into contact with the justice system in the first place. The government is working to keep people out of the justice system and ensure they are safe when in custody. But, when there are steps backwards, we need to call them out and listen to those calling for change. Minister McCarthy has encouraged the Northern Territory government to carefully review Coroner Armitage's recent report into the death of another young man in Yuendumu and to consider the coroner's recommendations in full. These independent processes are key to identifying and fixing the causes of these unacceptable deaths in custody. Recent deaths in custody have compounded the collective grief and trauma felt by many First Nations families.
  • Finally, I return to Kumanjayi White, a young man who has tragically died. On behalf of the government, I again extend my deepest condolences to his family and the community of Yuendumu, who have suffered too much.
• Kerrynne Liddle, South Australia, LP, 09:12 5 min [8]
  • South Australia 09:12 () (): Well, every death, of course, is a tragedy. There is much to explain about how Kumanjayi White became another statistic to be investigated as a death in custody, but that focus is not for us in here. Kumanjayi's grieving family deserve answers. I acknowledge their immense grief. Australians too deserve answers.
  • The recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, released in 1991, outlined what needed to be done. Indigenous Australians were disproportionately incarcerated, and they were also overrepresented in the numbers of deaths in custody. The royal commission report was a blueprint for change. Change then was necessary. Thirty-four years later, the job is still not done. The Australian Institute of Criminology says there have been 60 deaths in custody so far this year, including 17 of Indigenous people.
  • In the Northern Territory, legislation and police procedure dictate how deaths in custody are investigated. This includes oversight by the police Professional Standards Command, along with separate police and coronial investigations, and there is potential for further independent inquiry through an ombudsman and/or the NT ICAC.
  • In June, the Prime Minister said he needed to be convinced that people in Canberra know better than people in the Northern Territory about how to deal with these issues. As is appropriate, I will wait for those processes to conclude, but, in my role as shadow minister for Indigenous Australians, I will reflect on the protective factors -- some of which are provided by good policy and programs -- that clearly failed Kumanjayi White and, in so many ways, so many others.
  • Late last night, the most recent Closing the Gap report was publicly released. It is 157 pages of data, statistics and commentary, but behind all of those statistics and all of that data are real people living and struggling with issues that many of us in here don't live every day. The Productivity Commission reports annually on progress to enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and governments to work together to achieve life outcomes equality for Indigenous Australians. The terrible truth is that gap is not closing the way that was expected. There are 19 targets, and only four are on track. Another four are going in the wrong direction.
  • The report is yet another sobering reminder of how little progress is being made. It is a picture of missed opportunity, low expectations and tangible failure for delivering results, for which all parliaments and all parties have a responsibility. But the reality is too that it's everyone's responsibility. For every year progress is not made, existing disadvantage is entrenched, suffering is prolonged and confidence in government is undermined. And, worse still, another new generation starts with an even bigger struggle than the previous one.
  • For the government, four key targets that were already going backwards continue to worsen: adult incarceration, children commencing school developmentally on track, children in out-of-home care and suicide. Law and order, addressing family violence, and hope are central to securing better outcomes. That comes with focus on one of the most important protective factors -- family. But family can't do it alone.
  • (Time expired) When I was shadow minister for child protection and the prevention of family violence, it was clear that addressing violence and the known drivers of it would go a long way towards change. That requires tough decisions in here and by governments. It requires doing things that do good over things that make us feel good. We watched alcohol restrictions in the Northern Territory lapse in 2022, making central Australia less safe for everyone. It was also catastrophic in its impact on all of the social determinants of health. In the month that followed, domestic violence assaults in Alice Springs leapt 77 per cent, leaving lasting consequences for those who live locally. We saw the NAAJA, the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency, in freefall because of poor governance, and, without early intervention, people were left unrepresented. As parliamentarians, a greater focus of our work must be on prevention and early intervention. There is so much focus on justice and incarceration, but, if individuals have come into contact with the justice system, the reality is we've already failed them. When they are captured by the cycle of release and return, then we fail them again. To deliver change, you need to do the hard stuff. That's why the gap is not closing.
• Larissa Waters, Queensland, AG, 09:17 5 min [10]
  • Queensland Leader of the Australian Greens 09:17 ( -- ) (): The Greens strongly support this motion. On Tuesday 27 May, a 24-year-old Warlpiri man from Yuendumu, Kumanjayi White, died in custody after being restrained by plain-clothes NT police members inside the Coles supermarket in Mparntwe/Alice Springs. He was a young man living with a disability, and he was in town accessing care and services. Our hearts go out to Mr White's family, friends and community. I cannot imagine the grief and loss that they're experiencing at this time. The Australian Greens offer our deepest condolences and wish them the space and the time for grief and mourning. We stand in solidarity with the Yuendumu and Warlpiri communities. We join their calls for justice, and we echo the family's demands for an independent investigation, for the officers involved to be stood down, for the release of CCTV and body camera footage and for the Northern Territory police to apologise for and cease publicly criminalising Kumanjayi White in their statements.
  • This week, we learned, according to the Australian Institute of Criminology's live dashboard, that there have been 602 First Nations deaths in custody since the royal commission concluded in 1991. It is a shameful indictment on us all that so many of the recommendations from that royal commission remain unfulfilled. This government and this parliament must be leaders who push our states and territories to do more until we implement those recommendations in full and address the structural racism that exists in the justice system.
  • Kumanjayi White's death occurred as the final coronial report on the 2019 death in custody of another Warlpiri man, Kumanjayi Walker, was due to be published. That inquest exposed deep failures of justice and found the Northern Territory police to be 'an organisation with hallmarks of institutional racism'. In the NT, 84 per cent of incarcerated adults are Aboriginal, despite Aboriginal adults only making up 25.9 per cent of the NT adult population. One hundred per cent of young people imprisoned in the Northern Territory are Aboriginal. Many of those adults and young people are on remand, yet to be convicted. These alarming trends represent a longstanding failure of the justice system to address underlying causes of harm and violence. Funding needs to shift from policing and prisons to community focused solutions led by First Nations people.
  • The family of Kumanjayi Walker and the Yuendumu community, alongside 23 Aboriginal community family violence and legal organisations, published an open letter earlier this week, calling on the Finocchiaro Northern Territory government to publicly commit to the findings and recommendations of Coroner Armitage in the coronial inquest into the death of Kumanjayi Walker and to engage with First Nations communities and the legal sector. It said, in part:
  • Aboriginal people have the solutions and now is the time to work with us to ensure that our people thrive and our children grow up safe and supported. Change is not only possible, but also well overdue.
  • ... ... ...
  • Warlpiri people and all Aboriginal people want lasting change that uplifts our people and ensures a strong, healthy future for generations to come. We do not need to be "fixed" by others -- now is the time to genuinely listen, to clear the path for our autonomy, and to provide the resources and support that will enable us to shape our own future. This is what will bring lasting solutions and restore trust. These are not only the right things to do, they are essential steps to prevent needless loss of life and build a better future for all. We are ready to work together for profound, lasting change. We urge you to act now and to act boldly.
  • The Greens strongly support their calls for an independent and robust mechanism for police accountability in the Northern Territory -- and everywhere, frankly -- and for greater investment in community-controlled services.
  • A genuine investment in community rather than policing has never been more urgent, as the NT has reduced the age of criminal responsibility to the age of 10 and they're now shamefully moving to reintroduce spit hoods, which are a recognised form of torture. And we're only on track to meet four of the 19 Closing the Gap targets. It is shameful.
  • (Time expired) We acknowledge the profound grief and anger felt by Kumanjayi Walker's family, the Warlpiri and Yuendumu communities and First Nations people across the country. We express our sorrow over his death and for the racism, violence and systemic over-incarceration of First Nations people that's led to 602 losses of life. The time to act is now.
• David Pocock, Australian Capital Territory, IND, 09:22 2 min [3]
  • Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 09:22 ( -- ) (): I rise to speak in support of Senator Thorpe's motion. I would like to thank her for her tireless work on this issue and for trying to get elected representatives, our Senate and our parliament to take this more seriously after decades and decades of inaction. This is something that affects all states and territories. If you look here in the nation's capital, in the ACT, two Indigenous men died in custody within four days at Canberra's only prison in mid-February this year. We've had three deaths in custody at AMC since August 2024.
  • These deaths have rightly prompted demands from families and people in Indigenous communities for leaders to actually get on with long-overdue reform. In May 2025, the ACT government committed to establishing an independent inquiry into systemic issues concerning Indigenous detainees. This is clearly part of a bigger crisis, and I don't understand why we haven't seen more appetite from the major parties to really deal with this. Again, I thank Senator Thorpe for her work.
  • Here, in the ACT, we've seen Thomas Emerson MLA doing some great work in the legislative assembly to push the Labor government here and to actually align their actions with their rhetoric and sort this out. I'd also like to mention Julie Tongs from Winnunga. She has been a fierce voice in this debate and is constantly pushing for change, as well as people like Joe Hedger and many others who, I think, have finally got the ACT government to start to take this seriously.
• David Shoebridge, New South Wales, AG, 09:24 [5]
  • New South Wales 09:24 () (): I want to thank Senator Thorpe for bringing this motion to the chamber, and I start by joining with my party leader, my colleague Senator Waters, in expressing our deep and sincere condolences and our sympathy to the family of Kumanjayi White. Kumanjayi was a 24-year-old Warlpiri man living with disability. He went into Alice Springs to seek care and services. While he was there seeking care and services -- a story that happens so often around this country -- being a First Nations man in a shopping centre on a public street, he found himself 'restrained' -- I think that's the language the Northern Territory police used -- by two Northern Territory police in the confectionery aisle of Coles, and, as so often happens in interactions between First Nations peoples and police forces across this country, the interaction was lethal and Kumanjayi was killed as a result of the police actions, the restraint that he suffered. Did I mention that he was a 24-year-old man, a young man going to Alice to seek access to care and services? What he got was death by police in the confectionery aisle of a Coles supermarket.
  • Our thoughts and our hearts are with his family and the community. There is just so much sorry business in this country, and so much of it happens at the hands of the criminal justice system -- or, as First Nations people will tell you, the 'criminal injustice system' -- that this country has. There have been more than 600 deaths of First Nations people at the hands of the criminal justice system since the royal commission, and there are hundreds and thousands of deaths that predate that. In my home state of New South Wales, tragically, I've worked with so many families who have had their boys, their husbands, their sisters, their aunties or their cousins killed at the hands of police. I still remember the appalling way in which David Dungay was treated. He was killed by police restraint in Long Bay prison in Sydney. In the video that you see of David, who was restrained by police because he was eating a packet of biscuits, he's crying, 'I can't breathe; I can't breathe; I can't breathe; I can't breathe,' and a mob of corrections officers are forcing him down -- he can't breathe; he can't breathe -- until they killed him. To see that history being repeated in the NT, in the confectionery aisle of Coles, is obscene. Tane Chatfield, Dwayne Johnstone, Tammy Shipley, TJ Hickey, Veronica Saunders -- these names. Families, aunties -- the pain of this sorry business at the hands of the criminal justice system reaches across this country into First Nations families.
  • And, while we have been in this parliament for the last two weeks, the racist criminal justice system in the Northern Territory has ratcheted up. The Northern Territory government, instead of responding with compassion and empathy and care, are refusing to institute an independent inquiry into Kumanjayi's death. Police investigating police -- we know where that will end. Instead of meeting with the Commonwealth government and seeking the funding so support can go into First Nations led community services, diversion services and culture services -- which all the evidence says will keep communities safe, keep young First Nations kids safe and instil pride and spirit -- what has the Northern Territory government done this week? They have rammed through legislation to reintroduce spit hoods on kids, which the UN has said is torture. They've rammed through legislation to remove 'jail as the last resort' and to encourage magistrates and judges to put kids in jail. As Senator Waters made clear, the statistics say that tonight pretty much every kid in a Northern Territory jail will be a First Nations kid.
  • What has the Commonwealth done? Nada; zip; nothing. The Commonwealth government funds the Northern Territory government, by and large, to torture kids in jail. The Commonwealth government funds the Northern Territory government to not put in place independent investigations of deaths in custody. Action, Commonwealth action, using funding and legislative powers to try and do what we can to keep First Nations people safe -- that's what's needed.
  • Question agreed to.
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Motions / Aboriginal Deaths In Custody
  • Speaker Count: 7
  • Speakers: Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP); Lidia Thorpe (IND); Murray Watt (ALP); Kerrynne Liddle (LP); Larissa Waters (AG); David Pocock (IND); David Shoebridge (AG)
  • Rational Thought Positives: Lidia Thorpe (IND): quoted source material: "These are not just statistics; they are sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, cousins, siblings and grandchildren lost to a system that continues to harm our people. Ned Hargraves, a senior Warlpiri elder and the grandfather of Kumanjayi White, spoke for many when he said: 'We are devastated by this death."; Lidia Thorpe (IND): source-backed reasoning: "It is a national responsibility -- a moral one. The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody in 1991 made clear what needs to be done, yet, decades later, those recommendations remain largely unimplemented and ignored."; Lidia Thorpe (IND): source-backed reasoning: "This motion is about committing to practical, overdue action, supported by evidence and backed by First Peoples. It calls for federal leadership that works with states and territories to ensure that every death in custody is properly investigated, that recommendations are tracked and implemented and that families are treated with respect and dignity."; Murray Watt (ALP): data with source signal: "She's also working closely with the Attorney-General for plans to raise the issue at the Standing Council of Attorneys-General in August. It is simply unacceptable that 602 First Nations people have died in custody since the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody."; Murray Watt (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "The royal commission was clear that the best way to reduce First Nations deaths in custody is to reduce the high incarceration rate of First Nations people, including through social and economic responses, which the evidence shows can reduce crime, change the course of lives and avoid people coming into contact with the police or justice system in the first place."; Murray Watt (ALP): data with source signal: "Closing the gap in these key areas, along with economic empowerment, is key to breaking cycles of incarceration and reincarceration. In the Northern Territory, over 220 houses were built in remote communities last year, and 206 houses were built in the previous year."; Kerrynne Liddle (LP): source-backed reasoning: "Australians too deserve answers. The recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, released in 1991, outlined what needed to be done."; Kerrynne Liddle (LP): source-backed reasoning: "Indigenous Australians were disproportionately incarcerated, and they were also overrepresented in the numbers of deaths in custody. The royal commission report was a blueprint for change."; Kerrynne Liddle (LP): data with source signal: "Thirty-four years later, the job is still not done. The Australian Institute of Criminology says there have been 60 deaths in custody so far this year, including 17 of Indigenous people."; Larissa Waters (AG): data with source signal: "We join their calls for justice, and we echo the family's demands for an independent investigation, for the officers involved to be stood down, for the release of CCTV and body camera footage and for the Northern Territory police to apologise for and cease publicly criminalising Kumanjayi White in their statements. This week, we learned, according to the Australian Institute of Criminology's live dashboard, that there have been 602 First Nations deaths in custody since the royal commission concluded in 1991."; Larissa Waters (AG): source-backed reasoning: "It is a shameful indictment on us all that so many of the recommendations from that royal commission remain unfulfilled."; Larissa Waters (AG): source-backed reasoning: "This government and this parliament must be leaders who push our states and territories to do more until we implement those recommendations in full and address the structural racism that exists in the justice system."; David Shoebridge (AG): data with source signal: "There is just so much sorry business in this country, and so much of it happens at the hands of the criminal justice system -- or, as First Nations people will tell you, the 'criminal injustice system' -- that this country has. There have been more than 600 deaths of First Nations people at the hands of the criminal justice system since the royal commission, and there are hundreds and thousands of deaths that predate that."
  • Speaker Response Positives: David Pocock (IND): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "Australian Capital Territory Independent ACT Whip 09:22 ( -- ) (): I rise to speak in support of Senator Thorpe's motion."; David Pocock (IND): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "Again, I thank Senator Thorpe for her work."; David Shoebridge (AG): responded to Lidia Thorpe (IND): "New South Wales 09:24 () (): I want to thank Senator Thorpe for bringing this motion to the chamber, and I start by joining with my party leader, my colleague Senator Waters, in expressing our deep and sincere condolences and our sympathy to the family of Kumanjayi White."; David Shoebridge (AG): responded to Larissa Waters (AG): "As Senator Waters made clear, the statistics say that tonight pretty much every kid in a Northern Territory jail will be a First Nations kid."
  • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.

• Victoria 09:30 () (): I seek leave to table a document, which is a list from the Israeli government's official record of Israeli civilians murdered by Hamas on and since 7 October 2023.
• Leave granted.
• I table the document.
• Continue / Sarah Henderson, Victoria, LP

• Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025 25 min [3]
  • Second Reading / Slade Brockman (The DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP, 09:35 3 min [1]
    • 09:35 (): The question is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Hodgins-May be agreed to.
  • In Committee 19 min [20]
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:38 1 min [1]
      • Victoria 09:38 () (): Minister, this legislation hasn't taken into account the unique operations and circumstances of Aboriginal community controlled services -- not just child care but holistic family supports and cultural strengths. What consideration was given to the impact of legislation on ACCO centres that offer more than child care and are often community and service hubs?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:39 3 min [3]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:39 ( -- ) (): Thank you very much, Senator Hodgins-May. And thank you, as the Greens spokesperson on early childhood education and care, for your support for and interest in this legislation and for your significant engagement with my office and, more broadly, with stakeholders on this really important piece of legislation.
      • This bill is incredibly important. We said that child safety was our top priority when it comes to early childhood education and care. We said we would introduce a bill in the first sitting of this parliament to make sure that we have a new power as the Commonwealth to withdraw Commonwealth childcare subsidy from those providers who don't put children first. That is exactly what we are here to do today -- to pass this legislation, to be united as one parliament to do that and to make sure that we can keep children safer in early learning. We know that the Commonwealth childcare subsidy is a big lever that we have to pull, and it is a lever that we intend to use. Our message to providers who are not doing the right thing is that we want you to lift your game. Our priority is to work with those providers and work with our state regulators to do exactly that. We're really proud of this bill. We know that it will go a long way to sending a really strong message to providers across the board that they must invest in quality and safety in early childhood education.
      • We are a strong supporter of Aboriginal community-controlled early childhood education. We know that early education is an absolute game changer for children. It is particularly a game changer for children from disadvantaged backgrounds, including First Nations backgrounds. We know, even from recent Closing the Gap data, just how much of a game changer early childhood education is in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, and we know that culturally safe early childhood education is the key to good outcomes for young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We will continue to work with and support the ACCO sector, including in relation to this bill.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:42 [1]
      • Victoria 09:42 () (): A third of National Quality Standard quality assessments are out of date, more than three years old. We have heard that this backlog will make it difficult for the government to rely on quality assessments and ultimately will reduce the effectiveness of the legislation. Minister, how will the government address this issue and ensure that national quality standard assessments are brought up to date? Will you adequately fund the state and territory governments to ensure that they properly assess quality in a timely manner?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:42 3 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:42 ( -- ) (): This bill gives the Commonwealth the power, and gives the secretary of the department the ability, to apply sanctions to providers who are not doing a good enough job of keeping our children safe, and that includes suspending or cancelling funding for existing services that they may have if safety standards are not being met. It also includes giving the secretary the ability to ensure that any future services of those providers who are not putting children first will not be approved, so it the prevents their expansion. There's a number of criteria that the secretary will consider when making those decisions, and one of those is a criteria that you've mentioned, which is a failure to meet our National Quality Standards, particularly as it pertains to safety and quality.
      • The secretary also has the capacity to look at serious incidents and the nature and frequency of those serious incidents. Also the secretary has the capacity to look at providers' legal compliance on a range of related safety legislation, look at complaints and also look at the work with the state regulators, including conditions that they may have already imposed on early childhood providers. So there's a range of criteria that the secretary can look at when considering whether to use this powerful lever. Meanwhile, we continue to work, shoulder to shoulder, with the states and territories. We have a strong and significant package of reform that we're working through with the states and territories. We'll have more to say about that after we hold our urgent, standalone early childhood education ministers meeting in a couple of weeks.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:45 [1]
      • Victoria 09:45 () (): I don't feel any more reassured about the backlog and the significant delays on those national quality standards after that answer, but I urge you to provide more information as you get it following those consultations with states. What is the threshold in the National Quality Standard assessment that would prevent a provider from opening a new CCS-approved service if they are already operating existing centres? I'm keen to understand a bit more about the threshold.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:45 3 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:45 ( -- ) (): The criteria are set out in the bill. I've just run through the criteria that the secretary can consider when -- in this case with the current secretary of the department -- he is considering either removing funding from providers who already have established services, or when he is considering preventing providers from opening additional services.
      • What we want to see, of course, is all providers meeting the national quality standards. Those standards don't need to be specified in this bill because they already exist and they stand outside of the bill in the National Quality Framework. We want to see providers meet the National Quality Standard. It's really important, in this bill, that we avoid being too prescriptive about the exact thresholds at which sanctions apply. The secretary is looking at a range of measures, including the national quality standards and how providers are going at meeting those standards. They're also looking at serious incidents. They're looking at other legal compliance with other state laws. They're looking at complaints. They're looking at conditions that may have been provided. They're also -- and this is clear in the legislation -- looking at whether any significant efforts have been made to improve compliance and improve safety. So it's important that the secretary has some flexibility, and, of course, in the meantime we expect every provider to meet the national quality standards.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:48 [1]
      • Victoria 09:48 () (): What framework will guide decisions about whether to publish information -- for example, why centres aren't being allowed to open a new centre or are having their subsidy blocked, or decisions along that way? Speaking to the concern from parents that this process might not be as transparent as they hoped, will parents be informed when information is withheld and why? In my home state of Victoria, we're having real issues in getting the government to release documentation about breaches that have occurred in centres. So I would like to provide some assurance to parents.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:48 2 min [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:48 ( -- ) (): I think the first assurance that we should provide parents is that the vast majority of our early childhood education and care providers do meet and exceed our national quality standards, but there is a small group of providers who persistently and consistently breach those standards. Where we have significant concerns, transparency for parents is really important, and it is provided for in the bill. We have greater publication powers with this bill than we've had before. The secretary is able to publish on our enforcement action register when CCS approval is being dealt with under this legislation. The secretary will also have a wider range of powers to publicise the broader range of compliance actions that are being taken in relation to CCS.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:50 [1]
      • Victoria 09:50 () (): To understand that a little more clearly, what framework will guide whether they decide to list those events or those actions?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:50 2 min [2]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:50 ( -- ) (): Importantly, the bill gives the secretary powers that they haven't had before to make actions taken under the legislation public. The disposition will be to publish. We think parents have a right to know about compliance action in relation to the services that their children are in. There is also a broader body of work in relation to that transparency going on with the education minister's process that we've been talking about.
      • Of course, we need to manage parents' understanding of what's going on in their services and make sure that they're confident. If publication would cause any harm to a service, and, really, to the families in that service, then that needs to be taken into consideration. It's probably also important to note that, if there's any imminent risk to children in an early learning service, the state regulators have the power to close those services down, and they can and do use those powers.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:52 [1]
      • Victoria 09:52 () (): Thank you, Minister. It sounds like at the moment there aren't clear guidelines but it's at the discretion of the secretary to decide, but I'm hearing that they'll err on the side of disclosure. Is that accurate?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:52 [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:52 ( -- ) (): Yes.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:52 1 min [1]
      • Victoria 09:52 () (): I circle back to my previous question in relation to the threshold in the National Quality Standard assessments that would prevent a provider from opening a new centre if they're already operating centres. Is there some sort of standard by which you're looking at it? If half of the centres, for example, aren't meeting national quality standards, or 90 per cent of services aren't -- can you provide any more detail on what that standard will look like and what is being considered in the decision to permit a new centre to open or not?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:53 [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:53 ( -- ) (): I refer you to my previous answer, in the sense that the secretary has the capacity to look at a number of criteria at once, and it's important to do that. For example, if a service is not meeting a quality and safety standard in the National Quality Framework but is making significant efforts at improvement, that needs to be taken into account. The criteria that will be used by the secretary are provided for in the bill.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:53 1 min [1]
      • Victoria 09:53 () (): Minister, how will the requirements under this legislation be applied, if at all, to centres that don't come under the National Quality Standard?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:54 [1]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:54 ( -- ) (): The bill covers providers that receive the Commonwealth childcare subsidy. I think you're referring to another dreadful case that came to light, where there are a small number of providers outside the National Quality Framework. If they're in receipt of the Commonwealth childcare subsidy, the bill applies to them.
    • Steph Hodgins-May, Victoria, AG, 09:54 1 min [1]
      • Victoria 09:54 () (): Minister, what consideration has been given to the impact on the early childhood education workforce incentive with the new requirements?
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 09:55 2 min [3]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:55 ( -- ) (): This bill is incredibly important. We know that there have been really distressing allegations of abuse in our early learning services. Every child needs to be safe, and every parent needs to have confidence that they are. This bill will go a long way to ensuring that, and it's really important that we have this lever -- that we're able to withdraw Commonwealth funding from those providers who are not putting child safety first.
      • I think you know, Senator Hodgins-May, that you don't have to tell me how incredibly important the workforce is in keeping children safe and providing quality early education because I proudly represented the early childhood educators in their union before coming to parliament. One of the really significant things that we've done to invest in quality and safety outside of this particular legislation is invest $3.6 billion in a really long overdue pay rise for our early childhood educators. That is absolutely critical to quality and safety, because what it's done is help deal with the workforce crisis that had existed over the previous decade when there was a very high turnover of early childhood educators. We know that the safest and best-quality services are services that have long-term, stable, committed, dedicated early childhood educators who know the children, the families and each other and who are committed to a child-safe culture.
      • Since we started to implement the pay rise, we've had a reduction in job vacancies being advertised by 26 per cent, which is huge and was unheard of over the last several years. That's happened at the same time as we've grown the workforce. So it's a really significant stabilisation of the workforce. It's a stabilisation that respects them, values them and invests in them and their ability to have a child-safe culture and provide that security to children and families.
    • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 09:57 [5]
      • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 09:57 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That the committee report progress and ask leave to sit again.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Progress reported.
      • Ordered that the committee have leave to sit again at a later hour.
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: In Committee
      • Speaker Count: 3
      • Speakers: Steph Hodgins-May (AG); Jess Walsh (ALP); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
      • Speaker Response Positives: Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Steph Hodgins-May (AG): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:39 ( -- ) (): Thank you very much, Senator Hodgins-May."; Steph Hodgins-May (AG): explicit response signal: "Victoria 09:45 () (): I don't feel any more reassured about the backlog and the significant delays on those national quality standards after that answer, but I urge you to provide more information as you get it following those consultations with states."; Jess Walsh (ALP): explicit response signal: "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 09:53 ( -- ) (): I refer you to my previous answer, in the sense that the secretary has the capacity to look at a number of criteria at once, and it's important to do that."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Steph Hodgins-May (AG): "I think you know, Senator Hodgins-May, that you don't have to tell me how incredibly important the workforce is in keeping children safe and providing quality early education because I proudly represented the early childhood educators in their union before coming to parliament."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt By 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025 26 min [4]
  • In Committee 14 min [3]
    • Mehreen Faruqi, New South Wales, AG, 10:00 1 min [17]
      • New South Wales Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens 10:00 ( -- ) (): I move Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3369:
      • (1) Page 33 (after line 22), at the end of the Bill, add:
      • Schedule 4 -- Maximum student contribution amounts for places
      • Part 1 -- Amendments
      • Higher Education Support Act 2003
      • 1 Section 93-10
      • maximum student contribution amount for a place maximum student contribution amount for a place Omit "The ", substitute "(1) Subject to subsection (2), the ".
      • 2 At the end of section 93-10
      • Add:
      • Higher Education Support Amendment (Job Ready Graduates and Supporting Regional and Remote Students) Act 2020 (2) The table in subsection (1) has effect in relation to a place in a unit of study included in the Society and Culture part of the *first funding cluster as if the amount specified for that part of the cluster in respect of both a non-grandfathered student and a grandfathered student was instead the amount specified for that place in the unit of study immediately before the amendments made by Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the commenced.
      • Part 2 -- Application provision
      • 3 Application
      • The amendments made by Part 1 of this Schedule apply in relation to a unit of study that has a *census date that is on or after the commencement of that Part (whether the unit of study is part of a course of study commenced before, on or after the commencement of that Part).
      • This amendment reverses the Job-ready Graduates fee hikes. The Albanese government talks a big game about their cost-of-living credentials, but the reality is that, under their watch, fees for degrees have skyrocketed, with students now paying in excess of $50,000 for an arts degree.
      • When the Morrison government introduced their disastrous, punitive, Job-ready Graduates Package, Labor was strong in opposition, but they have now had over three years in power and have done nothing about it. Even their own Universities Accord process found that the fee hikes required urgent remediation. Just this week, over a hundred well-known Australians signed an open letter urging the Albanese government to abolish Job-ready Graduates and implement a system that does not punish students who choose to study humanities and social sciences.
      • So Labor crowing about their one-off debt cut does nothing for the students who are starting university this year and facing ballooning fees. It also does nothing for the high-school graduates that are deciding not to go to university because they can't afford to. If the government was serious about relief for students, the Job-ready Graduate fee hikes would have been reversed back in 2022, but, unfortunately, this was not the case.
      • Labor still has an opportunity to support this amendment and make $50,000 arts degrees a thing of the past. So I commend the amendment to the Senate and urge others to support it, because we need to urgently repeal this punitive package.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 10:01 [8]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:01 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Faruqi for her amendment. The government is not in a position to support this amendment at this time.
      • The government is currently responding to a range of recommendations from the Universities Accord. We have implemented or are in the process of implementing 31 of the 47 recommendations of the accord in full or in part. This includes making the indexation of HELP debts fairer, cost-of-living relief for students, support for people from the outer suburbs and regions to go to university, and structural reforms to our tertiary education system.
      • Last year the government wiped $3 billion of HELP debt for three million Australians and fixed indexation on HELP debt so that it will never increase faster than wages. For an individual with an average HELP debt of $26,500, around $1,200 has been wiped from their outstanding student loan.
      • Commonwealth prac payments started on 1 July 2025 for the first time. These will support about 68,000 eligible teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students while they are completing their compulsory practical training at university.
      • From 1 January 2025, the government massively expanded fee-free uni-ready courses to help more students from disadvantaged backgrounds get a chance to access university. We've also established the interim Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, from 1 July 2025. The Minister for Education has said we'll keep working through the accord's recommendations and we'll take advice from the Australian Tertiary Education Commission.
      • This bill cuts student debt by 20 per cent and delivers important structural reforms to repayments, which will benefit generations to come. This is the commitment the Australian people supported at the last election.
      • ( Senator Chandler ): The question before the chair is that Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3369, moved by Senator Faruqi, be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Claire Chandler (The TEMPORARY CHAIR), Tasmania, LP
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: In Committee
      • Speaker Count: 2
      • Speakers: Mehreen Faruqi (AG); Jess Walsh (ALP)
      • Rational Thought Positives: Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "The government is not in a position to support this amendment at this time. The government is currently responding to a range of recommendations from the Universities Accord."; Jess Walsh (ALP): data with source signal: "We have implemented or are in the process of implementing 31 of the 47 recommendations of the accord in full or in part."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "We've also established the interim Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, from 1 July 2025. The Minister for Education has said we'll keep working through the accord's recommendations and we'll take advice from the Australian Tertiary Education Commission."
      • Speaker Response Positives: Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:01 ( -- ) (): I thank Senator Faruqi for her amendment."; Jess Walsh (ALP): responded to Mehreen Faruqi (AG): "( Senator Chandler ): The question before the chair is that Greens amendment (1) on sheet 3369, moved by Senator Faruqi, be agreed to."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
  • Adoption Of Report / Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 10:14 7 min [4]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:14 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That the report from the committee be adopted.
    • I note that former senator Janet Rice is in the chamber -- welcome back! The question is that the report from the committee be adopted.
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Third Reading 4 min [3]
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 10:21 4 min [4]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 10:21 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That the bill be now read a third time.
      • The question is that the motion moved by the minister be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG, 10:25 [3]
      • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 10:25 ( -- ) (): President, I'd just like to draw attention to the state of the opposition benches for the last 15 minutes. They seem to have been invisible, missing, on the important issue of student debt --
      • Senator Hanson-Young, this is not a time for a statement. It's not appropriate for a quorum because there are senators in here. The practice in this place is that we don't comment on whether senators are in the chamber or not, and I expect all senators to respect that.
      • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Third Reading
      • Speaker Count: 2
      • Speakers: Jess Walsh (ALP); Sarah Hanson-Young (AG)
      • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.
• Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 13 min [4]
  • Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
  • First Reading / Jenny McAllister, New South Wales, ALP, 10:26 1 min [4]
    • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 10:26 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Bills read a first time.
  • Second Reading 11 min [5]
    • Jenny McAllister, New South Wales, ALP, 10:27 [25]
      • New South Wales Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme 10:27 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That these bills be now read a second time.
      • Hansard I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in .
      • Leave granted.
      • The speeches read as follows --
      • CUSTOMS AMENDMENT (AUSTRALIA-UNITED ARAB EMIRATES COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION) BILL 2025
      • Customs Act 1901 The Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 amends the to implement the Free Trade Agreement known as the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between Australia and the United Arab Emirates.
      • The Agreement will bring both commercial and strategic benefits. The UAE is Australia's largest trade and investment partner in the Middle East. In 2024, total trade between UAE and Australia was worth $12.3 billion. UAE investment into Australia rose to $14.7 billion in 2024 while our investment in the UAE rose to $9.0 billion resulting in two-way trade of $23.7 billion.
      • The Agreement will give a competitive advantage to Australian exporters by eliminating tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian exports, by value; to the UAE.
      • It is estimated that this will result in tariff savings of up to $135 million on Australian goods exported to the UAE in the first year, rising to $160 million as tariffs are progressively eliminated over five years.
      • The Agreement locks in access to services markets, and provides a framework to facilitate investment to support Australia's energy transition and Future Made in Australia ambitions. It will also improve certainty for exporters and importers, service suppliers and investors across the whole economy.
      • The Agreement will support a strong and diversified economy that will enhance the resilience of Australia's trade and investment to future crises. It will also enhance Australia's economic engagement with the UAE through strengthened trade rules that will help build upon our already healthy trading relationship.
      • The amendments contained in this Bill will establish, in the Customs Act, the rules of origin and document retention requirements called for by the Agreement. Those amendments determine when imported goods from the United Arab Emirates in accordance with the Agreement may be considered to have originating status, called UAE originating goods, and be eligible for preferential rates of customs duty.
      • Tariff Act 1995 Complementary amendments to the Customs are also required to provide for these preferential rates of customs duty applicable to UAE originating goods.
      • The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties reviewed both the Agreement and related supplementary Investment Agreement, and recommended that they be ratified.
      • I commend this Bill to the Chamber.
      • CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (AUSTRALIA-UNITED ARAB EMIRATES COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION) BILL 2025
      • Customs Tariff Act 1995 The Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 will amend the to implement the preferential rates of customs duty for UAE Originating Goods to implement the Free Trade Agreement known as the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between Australia and the United Arab Emirates.
      • These amendments, together with the amendments by the Customs Amendment (Australia United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, will ensure that Australia fulfils its obligations as a signatory to the Agreement and is prepared for the Agreement to enter into force for Australia.
      • This Bill will insert a new Schedule of duty rates into the Customs Tariff Act. Schedule 16 will contain the preferential rates of customs duty for imported goods that satisfy the rules of origin set out in the Agreement. UAE Originating Goods not set out in Schedule 16 will have a 'Free' rate of duty.
      • Australia has committed to reducing the rate of customs duty on most UAE Originating Goods to 'Free', either at entry into force or over several years following entry into force of the Agreement.
      • Excise-equivalent goods -- which are certain fuel, alcohol, tobacco and petroleum products -- that are UAE Originating Goods will continue to have excise equivalent duties of customs applied, so they receive the same treatment as domestically produced equivalents.
      • Finally, this Bill also amends certain tariff concessions to maintain their scope and ensure that commitments made under the Agreement are honoured.
      • The amendments in this Bill complement the amendments in the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025.
      • I commend this Bill to the Chamber.
    • Jonathon Duniam, Tasmania, LP, 10:27 4 min [6]
      • Tasmania Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 10:27 ( -- ) (): On behalf of the opposition, I'll make a contribution to these bills, the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 and Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025. It was the former coalition government who initiated the Australia-UAE agreement via announcement with the UAE in March of 2022.
      • When the former coalition agreement was elected in 2013, our goods and services covered by a free trade agreement were at 25 per cent, and by 2022 it had gone to 80 per cent, including the agreements with the UK and India. The former coalition government ratified the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the world's largest free trade agreement, and signed FTAs with Korea, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Peru and Indonesia, as well as regional agreements across the Indo-Pacific, including the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations, PACER, and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
      • Live sheep are a key commodity for the UAE, who import for religious, cultural and social reasons. This deal with the UAE could have supported the industry for years to come. Instead, those opposite have turned their backs on our farmers and left them out in the cold by ending the live sheep trade domestically.
      • Of course, there are some benefits to this agreement. The agreement is Australia's first free trade agreement with a nation of the Middle East. The UAE is Australia's largest trade and investment partner in the Middle East. Australian exporters will benefit from the elimination of tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exports to the UAE by value. Once fully implemented, it is estimated to increase Australian exports by around $678 million per annum. When fully implemented, CEPA will eliminate tariffs over 99 per cent of Australia's exports to the UAE by value, with most tariffs eliminated on entry into force or locked in at zero, and others eliminated over three or five stages.
      • Removal of the UAE's import tariffs will create commercially significant benefits for Australian exporters, which opens opportunities for Australian exporters to diversify into this important Middle East market and provides greater certainty on the tariff treatment they will receive. CEPA will also benefit exporters of products such as automotive parts, gold, nickel, coal and diamonds. Farmers and food and beverage producers stand to gain from our preferential access to the UAE's growing market for premium food and agricultural products with the elimination of tariffs on products such as frozen beef, sheepmeat, canola seeds, dry legumes and dairy.
      • With $9.43 billion in two-way goods and services trade in 2023 -- over $10 billion, of course, in the pre-COVID era -- the UAE is Australia's 21st-largest trading partner globally. Goods and services exports to the UAE were worth $5.2 billion in 2023 and were dominated by alumina, meat and oil seeds. Australian goods and services imports from the UAE were worth $4.7 billion in 2023 and mainly consisted of petroleum products and urea. Australian exporters will benefit from the elimination of tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exports to the UAE, by value. Once fully implemented, it's estimated to increase Australian exports by around $678 million per year.
    • Andrew Bragg, New South Wales, LP, 10:31 4 min [5]
      • New South Wales 10:31 () (): I want to put on record how important it is for pieces of legislation like these, the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 and Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025, to pass this parliament. We are a trading nation, and there will be much commentary over the coming months and years as countries like Australia respond to the United States' new tariff policy. Historically, it's not unusual for the United States to adopt a form of protectionism, nor is it unusual for Europeans and others to adopt a form of protectionism. But there are a couple of important lessons for Australia which must be mainstays of our trade policy going forward.
      • I note that the opposition's trade spokesman, Kevin Hogan, has been doing a great job here in presenting a very cogent analysis as we have been responding to the United States' tariff policies, which you would have to say are quite volatile policies at the best of times. One of those lessons is that the subsidisation of industry should be avoided at all costs. The nation went through a very difficult period in the eighties and nineties, when the Hawke government did the right thing and started to bring down the tariff wall and ended the policy of industry subsidisation. That is an important lesson for today, because initiatives to subsidise industry where government is picking winners -- as we have seen from this Future Made in Australia policy -- are destined to fail. It's throwing money -- taxpayers' funds -- at businesses and, frankly, misses the point of the role of government. The role of government is to ensure that a country can be competitive and can then concentrate on its comparative advantages. We need to have some sophistication as we respond to these huge policy ructions from the United States, and the subsidisation of industry must be avoided at all costs.
      • The other thing we must do -- and this has been put on record by Mr Hogan -- is find more avenues to diversify our trade. We will always be a trading nation and we have a relatively small domestic population, which relies on trade very heavily. In fact, any attempt to try and compare the economic positions of the United States and Australia really does miss this key point, I've noticed. The United States is a very large domestic market, sure, but it's also a trading nation. But it can get away with a lot of crazy ideas which we would be killed by. So we have to show fidelity to free trade. We must, as these bills propose to do, find ways to liberalise and open up new markets. We should always look to eliminate barriers to trade beyond the border and we must, at all costs, avoid the subsidisation of industry.
      • This is a disastrous policy, and, for a government that is a Labor government, it needs to go back and look very carefully at the policies of the Hawke government, which were the reverse of a lot of this government's industry subsidisation policies we see today. Mr Chalmers is a great devotee of the Hawke government. I think he's done some sort of doctoral thesis on the Hawke government. He might need to dig up this thesis. If he does so, he will find that the Hawke government eliminated the subsidisation of industry and brought down the tariff war, which is the reverse of what the Future Made in Australia policies will be doing in part.
      • I am very conscious that a lot of false comparisons between Australia and America are made in the public domain. Of course, we are culturally very alike, and America is one of our most important friends, but we are fundamentally different economies, and we cannot entertain any form of protectionism, nor should we ever entertain any form of industry subsidisation as we have seen canvassed in these past few months.
    • Nita Green, Queensland, ALP, 10:35 [6]
      • Queensland Assistant Minister for Tourism, Assistant Minister for Pacific Island Affairs and Assistant Minister for Northern Australia 10:35 ( -- ) (): I also rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025. The government is committed to seeking the entry into force of the Australia-UAE Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement as soon as possible to enable the realisation of its many benefits.
      • The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties of the previous parliament scrutinised this trade agreement and recommended that binding treaty action be taken to implement the agreement. I wish to express my sincere thanks to all members of the committee, of which I was one, but, most importantly, special thanks go to the former and current chair, Ms Lisa Chesters MP. There was an enormous amount of work involved in progressing that report as quickly as possible so that we could be in the position to consider that bill today.
      • This trade agreement includes ambitious outcomes to benefit both Australia and the UAE. These include eliminating tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exported to the UAE, valued at $160 million when fully implemented; valuable First Nations outcomes covering trade and investment; and acknowledging the importance of women's economic empowerment, as well as the importance of the environment and the transition to net zero. The UAE is Australia's largest trade and investment partner in the Middle East, with total trade between the UAE and Australia worth $12.3 billion in 2024. This trade agreement will give Australian exporters to the UAE a significant commercial edge over other international competitors.
      • Finally, the government's approach to trade recognises that Australia's economic resilience depends on open global trade relations underpinned by robust rules. 'More trade, not less' is a key part of how we will build the economic future we want in Australia, with secure, high-paying jobs and an open, internationally competitive economy powered by clean energy. This trade agreement with the UAE will assist Australia to reach its full economic potential. I'd like to thank my fellow members for supporting the legislation that will ratify this important trade agreement, and I'd like to put on record my thanks to the minister and his team for their very hard work in negotiating, achieving and, hopefully today, ratifying this important trade agreement.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Bills read a second time.
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Second Reading
      • Speaker Count: 4
      • Speakers: Jenny McAllister (ALP); Jonathon Duniam (LP); Andrew Bragg (LP); Nita Green (ALP)
      • Rational Thought Positives: Jenny McAllister (ALP): data with source signal: "The Agreement will give a competitive advantage to Australian exporters by eliminating tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian exports, by value; to the UAE. It is estimated that this will result in tariff savings of up to $135 million on Australian goods exported to the UAE in the first year, rising to $160 million as tariffs are progressively eliminated over five years."; Jonathon Duniam (LP): data with source signal: "Australian exporters will benefit from the elimination of tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exports to the UAE by value. Once fully implemented, it is estimated to increase Australian exports by around $678 million per annum."; Jonathon Duniam (LP): data with source signal: "Australian exporters will benefit from the elimination of tariffs on over 99 per cent of Australian goods exports to the UAE, by value. Once fully implemented, it's estimated to increase Australian exports by around $678 million per year."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
  • Third Reading 1 min [3]
    • Matt O'Sullivan (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Western Australia, LP, 10:38 1 min [1]
      • ( Senator O'Sullivan ) 10:38 (): No amendments have been circulated. Does any senator require a Committee of the Whole stage? There being none, I call the minister to move the third reading.
    • Nita Green, Queensland, ALP, 10:39 [4]
      • Queensland Assistant Minister for Tourism, Assistant Minister for Pacific Island Affairs and Assistant Minister for Northern Australia 10:39 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That these bills be now read a third time.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Bills read a third time.
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Third Reading
      • Speaker Count: 2
      • Speakers: Matt O'Sullivan (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT) (LP); Nita Green (ALP)
      • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.
• Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code To Prevent And Respond To Gender-Based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025 33 min [3]
  • Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025
  • Second Reading 31 min [4]
    • Richard Dowling, Tasmania, ALP, 10:39 9 min [16]
      • Tasmania 10:39 () (): I note this is not my first speech. No student should be forced to choose between their education and their safety. For years now, the evidence has been clear and deeply troubling with respect to gender based violence in higher education communities, and specifically I refer to sexual assault and harassment. In earlier stages of this debate we heard a lot about statistics and figures, but I will repeat one of them from the National Student Safety Survey of 2021: one in 20 students reported sexual assault. Of these, only five per cent made a formal complaint. What does that mean? It means that, in a cohort of a thousand students, 50 have been assaulted, yet fewer than three of those assaults were formally reported. These are distressing figures. Just think about it: in any lecture theatre across the country, about five out of every hundred students in the room have experienced sexual assault since starting university. These figures are, of course, worse for females and even worse for students that identify as gender diverse and for students with a disability. Sadly, most have been left to carry that burden in silence, without knowing how to get the support they need and deserve. Starting university is supposed to be one of the most exciting periods of your life; it turns into one of the most terrifying.
      • Violence impacts a victim-survivor's mental and physical health and wellbeing. It can and does also negatively affect students' educational outcomes. They may be less able to attend or participate in classes, and in some cases they will withdraw from their studies altogether. I note the STOP Campaign submission to the Universities Accord panel, which found:
      • Multiple respondents detailed that they now live with mental health impacts, such as PTSD, anxiety, depression, suicide attempts, disordered eating and panic attacks as a result of their experiences. Many respondents also noted they were unable to go to class or attend campus in general due to fear of running into their perpetrator. Some were also forced to continue living in the same accommodation as their perpetrator, constantly living in a state of fear. Socially, victim-survivors often chose to not engage in social events as they felt unsafe. Some respondents also noted the destruction of past relationships and difficulty creating new relationships as a result of their experience of violence and harm.
      • That is a pretty disturbing submission from the STOP Campaign. Staff are also victims of gender based violence, and it can obviously result in reduced performance, absenteeism and more turnover of staff. These impacts directly challenge the core mission of universities and the education they provide.
      • It's our responsibility in this place to ensure proper governance, transparent reporting and accountability, to make sure that harm is prevented and that, when harm does occur, it is properly responded to -- that is, a response that ensures people are heard and have access to the trauma informed support they need to order to successfully achieve their educational outcomes. That's precisely what the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 and the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025 set out to do. These bills are a key outcome of the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education, which all education ministers across the federation signed up to. Once passed, these bills will hold higher education providers to consistently high standards to proactively prevent and respond to gender based violence.
      • The Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 introduces a National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence. It will ensure our universities and other higher education providers put safety first. It strengthens prevention, improves responses when harm happens and holds providers accountable for how they perform, right down to student accommodation. The Minister for Education will be able to set a national code that lays down best practice standards, and every provider will need to meet those standards.
      • To monitor and enforce the code, a new specialist gender based violence unit will be established within the Department of Education. Vice-chancellors and CEOs will be directly responsible for making sure their institutions comply, and they'll have to report every six months to their governing bodies. Compliance won't be a tick-and-flick exercise. It will require regular reporting on incident data and steps being taken to prevent and respond to gender based violence.
      • Let us recall that the 2017 Human Rights Commission recommended that every university establish advisory committees to address sexual violence. That recommendation was in 2017. Yet, as reporting by the ABC in February last year showed, a third of universities still did not have such committees. And too many fall short on transparency. This bill brings the transparency and oversight necessary -- regular annual reporting through the minister and to parliament -- and enhances accountability. By driving whole-of-institution cultural and regulatory reform in the higher education system, with over 1.5 million students and 130,000 staff, the bill will also help lead social change.
      • Another measure from the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education is the introduction of the National Student Ombudsman, who commenced in February this year. The Student Ombudsman enables higher education students to escalate complaints about the actions of their higher education provider, including gender based violence complaints. What I'm most pleased about with this bill is that the code will also include an enforceable requirement that providers implement the recommendations of the National Student Ombudsman. As Minister Clare noted in the other place, this gives the findings and recommendations of the ombudsman real teeth and will make sure they are put in place to improve our universities and other providers.
      • I will finish with some STOP Campaign submission quotes. Again, these are direct quotes from students. They are quite distressing, but I think it's really important to record why we are having this discussion now. The first quote is from a young student who said:
      • I experienced assault as a young adolescent. I was so excited to leave my home town and attend university, live on campus and make friends. It was one of the worst experiences of my life ... The culture on campus is indisputably unsafe and toxic.
      • It's pretty damning. Secondly, another student said:
      • I withdrew socially after I was assaulted, and struggled to scrape through my final year of university. I ended up deferring my Honours and not going back to university ... because I couldn't deal with walking around places where I knew I might see my perpetrators, or be reminded of them.
      • And finally, another said: 'I had panic attacks before class because I knew the perpetrator was in the class with me.' These are statements directly from students. That's why we're here debating this bill now, and it's more than overdue. The students should never have had these experiences. Horrifically, they did. It's incredibly brave that they did speak up. Because of their bravery, we can now take action. I'd like to read a final quote from the campaign submission which simply states:
      • Please listen to the voices of students and survivors as these are the opinions that matter.
      • For too long, students have been let down by their universities and by inaction by previous governments. That changes today. Students should be able to learn at universities and live on campus free from harassment or assault. We should do everything we can to reduce harm experienced within university settings. Let's be clear: passing this bill is not the end of the work. It's the foundation. No student should be forced to choose between their education and their safety. It's that simple.
    • Michelle Ananda-Rajah, Victoria, ALP, 10:48 12 min [13]
      • Victoria 10:48 () (): I wish I was not having to speak on this issue. I long for the day when we, as a parliament -- indeed, as a community -- do not know the meaning of gender based violence because it's no longer part of our lexicon. But, sadly, that is not the case. That is not the world we live in, even in 2025. Students and staff in any workplace need to feel safe. That is especially so in our educational spaces -- in our schools, as well as in our higher education settings. For too long, this problem of gender based violence has really been swept under the carpet.
      • There has been a testimonial injustice dealt out to the many students who have raised concerns, over at least a decade, with the powers that be in our universities. We all know, but take for granted, that safety is a prerequisite to participation -- in any setting, whether it be work or study, or in training centres, sporting teams and so on. But if you do believe, as I do, that education is the most powerful lever we have to climb up that ladder of social mobility, then not addressing gender based violence or any other type of barrier to participation is a denial of this country's wealth. It's denying our country the kind of wealth that it should realise because it holds people back. It holds people back and it results in worse social and educational outcomes ultimately.
      • We know the statistics around gender based violence -- something like one in 12 students in the past 12 months have experienced sexual harassment and one in six since starting university. That's very common. That's highly common. With regards to sexual assault, most extreme type of violence, it is one in 90 in the last 12 months and one in 20 since starting university.
      • These are almost certainly going to be underreported compared to the reality because most people do not disclose these types of events because the response, frankly, from the universities has been pretty poor. It's been completely substandard. We also know that, in terms of formal complaints made to the university, one in 30 students who were sexually harassed made a formal complaint. That's only three per cent. There is gross underreporting, and it is the same with sexual assault -- only 5.6 per cent have reported and made formal complaints to the university. The question must be asked as to why that is so.
      • In terms of the most prevalent settings within a higher education context, these incidents tend to occur in clubs and societies followed by student accommodation -- student accommodation, where people basically try and find sanctuary after a busy day at university or in class, wouldn't have been on my radar -- and, of course, then in private homes and residences. It is simply not good enough.
      • But the statistics belie the real burden, and that's only conveyed through qualitative data. I'll read out a few quotes here. This is from a student who experienced unsolicited sexual advances -- common; I certainly experienced it when I was a junior doctor -- 'Despite clearly mentioning that I was not interested, my colleague approached me. It was an invasion of personal space, and we were in my room preparing for an exam. He tried to kiss me, and I pulled back in shock. He said, "But you were talking so openly about wanting romantic and sexual freedom."' In what universe is that even acceptable? Apparently, this is the norm in our universities.
      • Then there are, of course, the catcalls. Is there any woman or girl around who has not ever been subjected to catcalls -- yelling, whistling, honking of cars and, worst case, stalking, which we know is even more prevalent now thanks to our online virtual worlds. This from a student: 'I was at college event at the bar ordering drinks, and this guy came up to me clearly drunk. He tried to look under my dress. I felt very self-conscious and walked away as fast as I could.' There are many women, girls and young women out there who have experienced this, and we all know what that feels like. You tend to freeze. You are so self-conscious and threatened that you revert to your primal response, which is fight or flight, and if it's flight, it's a sense of paralysis.
      • Then of course there are the invasive questions, the inappropriate language and the inappropriate jokes. 'Going to university, I dealt with men stalking me online, following my class timetable at uni to know where I was, and I tried to avoid them.' There was one quote that particularly jumped out at me from a student who used the bus at night-time to get about university. As you know, universities instituted these transport services at night in order to actually help students, particularly women, feel safe. But this is what one student disclosed: 'I was asked extremely private, personal and uncomfortable questions about my sex life by a uni bus driver when he used to drive me around the campus late at night.' You're essentially a captive audience in that kind of setting. It's just awful to read.
      • We also know that there are certain faculties and subjects at university which are male-dominated, and these areas are fraught, particularly for women students. These domains of study desperately need more gender balance in order to drive the kind of cultural change that is essential at university level. But this is what women encounter: 'I am a young woman who has studied in a massively male-dominated field. I often face comments from fellow students and lecturers about my physical appearance, ranging from unnecessary compliments to sexual and degrading comments. At times, when I have rejected the romantic advances from other students, I have been threatened to have my name slandered, which has the potential to greatly harm my academic career. I have also had men engage in intimidating behaviours after my rejection of them. I constantly fear being too nice.' That is the experience of millions of Australian women currently, as well as that of women in the past, and it's really as a nod to them that we are bringing forward this legislation.
      • As you know, Acting Deputy President O'Sullivan, in February of this year the National Student Ombudsman opened its doors for the first time. This is essentially a watchdog for the university sector. It is a watchdog with teeth. It has all the powers of a royal commission. It's designed to hold universities to account and increase transparency. It also has an educative role. So, if students are not getting the kinds of results that they need to get from universities, they can escalate to the ombudsman on all kinds of matters: discrimination, racism, Islamophobia, antisemitism, gender based violence -- you name it. But that's not enough; we have to go further, and that is why we've introduced this legislation.
      • This legislation will essentially bring forward a more robust framework to address gender based violence in universities, and it builds upon the ombudsman work. It essentially puts the onus on higher education providers to introduce preventive strategies, and it will have a much stronger compliance function with penalties attached. It imposes a positive duty on universities to lift their game. It will have a national code which will set best practice standards, which will be informed by the experts, and it will attempt to address the drivers that lead to this kind of behaviour. It will certainly prioritise prevention. It will hold the boards and the chairs, who are the vice-chancellors, the CEOs, of universities to account, and I think that's really important. If you really want to drive cultural change, you have to start at the top -- you have to hold the top dogs accountable -- and this is what this legislation will do. It will have an educative function and it will be transparent. It will report to the parliament. There will be regular reporting of incident data in these institutions.
      • The legislation will also -- and I think this is important -- establish a specialised unit, focused on gender based violence, in the Department of Education. Again, this unit will be designed to educate but also to enforce, and there will be public reporting, not only in this parliament -- I hope to see it on a website, for example, which will be accessible to all Australians, because there's nothing like shining a spotlight on poor behaviour. So it will have a naming and shaming function.
      • I will conclude by saying that this has been a long time coming, and I pay tribute to the many, many activists and advocates over a long period of time -- some, over 10 years -- who have worked towards this outcome. It is through your advocacy, your voices, your hard work, blood, sweat and tears, that we have delivered this. I'm proud that it has been a Labor government -- which, by the way, is female dominant, 56 per cent women, with cabinet agenda parity -- that has listened and is now taking substantive action to address this problem. But, as with all types of cultural problems, it takes time. It's not just frameworks, legislative bodies, agencies and watchdogs that do it. It takes a whole-of-society effort to expunge this kind of behaviour.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:00 [7]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:00 ( -- ) (): These bills provide for the establishment and enforcement of a national higher education code to prevent and respond to gender based violence. They are an important step in making students and staff safer on our campuses. I thank senators across the chamber for their contributions to this debate.
      • I note the second reading amendment from Senator Duniam. The government takes the issue of antisemitism at universities very seriously. Antisemitism, Islamophobia or any other form of racism, harassment, discrimination or intimidation must not be allowed to threaten the safety of students and staff on Australian university campuses or anywhere else. The Minister for Education has been clear that universities must enforce their codes of conduct and meet their legislative obligations, which include having policies around freedom of speech, fostering a safe environment and ensuring student and staff wellbeing.
      • Since 1 February this year, the independent National Student Ombudsman has been open for students. The ombudsman is a national first. It is available to handle complaints from students about experiences of antisemitism on university campuses. The ombudsman is required to report to government at the end of each financial year about the nature and number of complaints it has received.
      • The government is also anticipating the final report from the Race Discrimination Commissioner into racism, including antisemitism, at Australian universities. We have also received the Special Envoy's Plan to Combat Antisemitism from Ms Jillian Segal and will soon receive a report from the Special Envoy to Combat Islamophobia in Australia, Aftab Malik. The government will consider these reports carefully and respond accordingly. We want these independent bodies to have a chance to do their work rather than pre-empt any recommendations they might make. The government will not be supporting the second reading amendment as proposed at this time.
      • We are taking this action now as it forms a key commitment under the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education, following more than a decade of dedicated advocacy on behalf of victims-survivors of sexual assault and sexual harassment on campus. I commend these bills to the chamber.
      • The question is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Duniam be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Second Reading
      • Speaker Count: 3
      • Speakers: Richard Dowling (ALP); Michelle Ananda-Rajah (ALP); Jess Walsh (ALP)
      • Rational Thought Positives: Richard Dowling (ALP): data with source signal: "For years now, the evidence has been clear and deeply troubling with respect to gender based violence in higher education communities, and specifically I refer to sexual assault and harassment. In earlier stages of this debate we heard a lot about statistics and figures, but I will repeat one of them from the National Student Safety Survey of 2021: one in 20 students reported sexual assault."; Richard Dowling (ALP): quoted source material: "They may be less able to attend or participate in classes, and in some cases they will withdraw from their studies altogether. I note the STOP Campaign submission to the Universities Accord panel, which found: Multiple respondents detailed that they now live with mental health impacts, such as PTSD, anxiety, depression, suicide attempts, disordered eating and panic attacks as a result of their experiences."; Richard Dowling (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "Let us recall that the 2017 Human Rights Commission recommended that every university establish advisory committees to address sexual violence. That recommendation was in 2017."; Michelle Ananda-Rajah (ALP): data with source signal: "It holds people back and it results in worse social and educational outcomes ultimately. We know the statistics around gender based violence -- something like one in 12 students in the past 12 months have experienced sexual harassment and one in six since starting university."; Michelle Ananda-Rajah (ALP): quoted source material: "But the statistics belie the real burden, and that's only conveyed through qualitative data. I'll read out a few quotes here."; Michelle Ananda-Rajah (ALP): data with source signal: "I constantly fear being too nice.' That is the experience of millions of Australian women currently, as well as that of women in the past, and it's really as a nod to them that we are bringing forward this legislation. As you know, Acting Deputy President O'Sullivan, in February of this year the National Student Ombudsman opened its doors for the first time."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "It is available to handle complaints from students about experiences of antisemitism on university campuses. The ombudsman is required to report to government at the end of each financial year about the nature and number of complaints it has received."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "The government is also anticipating the final report from the Race Discrimination Commissioner into racism, including antisemitism, at Australian universities."; Jess Walsh (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "We have also received the Special Envoy's Plan to Combat Antisemitism from Ms Jillian Segal and will soon receive a report from the Special Envoy to Combat Islamophobia in Australia, Aftab Malik."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
  • Third Reading 1 min [3]
    • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 11:10 1 min [1]
      • 11:10 (): No amendments have been circulated. Does any senator require a committee stage? If not, I shall call the minister to move the third reading.
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:11 [4]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:11 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • That these bills be now read a third time.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Bills read a third time.
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Third Reading
      • Speaker Count: 2
      • Speakers: Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP); Jess Walsh (ALP)
      • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.
• Early Childhood Education And Care (Strengthening Regulation Of Early Education) Bill 2025 [3]
  • In Committee [4]
    • Consideration resumed.
    • Bill agreed to.
    • Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.
  • Third Reading / Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:12 [4]
    • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:12 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • That this bill be now read a third time.
    • Question agreed to.
    • Bill read a third time.

• Senator Whitten to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Minister for the Environment and Water, by no later than Friday 29 August 2025, the referral decision brief for Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation matter 2025/10161 -- Marine survey of the Bunbury continental shelf.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Prime Minister, by no later than 9.30 am on Wednesday, 27 August 2025:
• (a) any report or analysis or assessment undertaken by the Office of National Intelligence on the risk that climate change poses to Australia's national security in the period 21 May 2022 to 30 July 2025; and
• (b) papers and briefs prepared by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet in relation to any such report.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2024:
• (a) all documents, emails/internal correspondence, internal memoranda, meeting minutes and other records of interaction from 1 April to 31 October 2024 relating to the creation, development, approval or implementation of new budgets allocated to ANU colleges (College of Arts and Social Sciences (CASS), College of Asia and the Pacific (CAP), College of Business and Economics (CBE), College of Engineering and Computer Science (CECS), College of Law (CoL) and College of Health and Medicine (CoHM), College of Science (CoS)) midway through 2024;
• (b) all budget documents, financial statements, budget allocations, budget revisions, internal reports and associated documentation for each ANU college (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS), specifically relating to how each college addressed, managed or implemented decreases in recurrent budget allocations;
• (c) all documents, memoranda or briefing notes, emails, meeting notes, internal correspondence and records of discussions from 1 April to 31 October 2024 regarding how the ANU colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS) met new recurrent budget targets and any associated budget constraints or requirements;
• (d) all documents, memoranda, emails, meeting notes, file notes, correspondence, financial records, transfer documentation and records of decisions from 1 April to 30 October 2024 concerning how funds may have been shifted, transferred, or reallocated from recurrent budgets to other ANU account types including Q accounts, W accounts, S accounts, E accounts or any other account types from all ANU colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS);
• (e) all documents, emails/internal correspondence, meeting notes, briefing notes, papers from Council, papers from senior management group, papers from relevant committees of Council and records of discussions from 1 April to 31 October 2024 regarding discussions about the impact on core and discretionary services of the colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS) as a result of budget cuts or their ability to meet future core and discretionary services and obligations; and
• (f) all documents, emails/internal correspondence, meeting notes, briefing notes, papers from Council, papers from senior management group, papers from relevant committees of Council and records of discussions from 1 April to 30 June 2025 regarding discussions and decisions about the impact of over-expenditure of 2024 budget on the 2025 budget of the colleges (CASS, CAP, CBE, CECS, CoL, CoHM and CoS).
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2025:
• (a) the complete and unredacted results of the ANU staff survey conducted in March 2023, including all college, research school and portfolio-level breakdowns, demographic analysis and detailed response data;
• (b) the complete and unredacted results of the ANU staff survey conducted in September 2024, including all college, research school and portfolio-level breakdowns, demographic analysis and detailed response data; and
• (c) all supporting documentation, analysis, and reports prepared by the ANU in relation to both surveys, including any comparative analysis between the two survey periods.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That the Senate --
• Australian National University Act 1991 (a) notes that the functions of the Australian National University (ANU) are set out in the (the Act);
• (b) notes that the ANU receives additional Commonwealth funding in the form of the National Institutes Grant for research 'supporting the development of Australia's national unity and identity, including by improving Australia's understanding of itself and the history and culture of its Indigenous peoples, its Asia-Pacific neighbours, and its place in the international community';
• (c) further notes that more than 300 staff have left the ANU since the Renew ANU process commenced and that a range of courses, programs, projects and institutions have been proposed either for significantly reduced staffing or disestablishment including the School of Music, the Humanities Research Centre, the Australian National Dictionary Centre, the Australian Dictionary of Biography and the Centre for European Studies;
• (d) notes that these changes imperil the ANU's capacity to fulfil its functions under the Act; and
• (e) resolves that the ANU shall be instructed to pause any further forced redundancies or other terminations of ongoing staff until the Education and Employment Legislation Committee concludes its inquiry into the quality of governance at Australian higher education providers and presents its report.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2025, a copy of any email correspondence sent by the Chancellor to ANU Council members relating to a purported breach of Council confidentiality as referenced in an on campus bulletin on 8 July 2025.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That there be laid on the table by the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University (ANU), by no later than 9.30 am on 28 August 2024:
• (a) all documents, including but not limited to correspondence, emails, briefing notes, minutes, reports, memoranda and records of meetings or discussions, related to or that discuss the ANU budget forecasts for the period 2024-27 prepared in 2023 by the then Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and Provost including assumptions underlying the forecast, and projected revenue growth and expenditure; and
• (b) all documents, including but not limited to correspondence, emails, briefing notes, minutes, reports, memoranda and records of meetings or discussions, related to the ANU budget forecasts for the period 2024-27 prepared in 2023 by the then CFO and Provost related to the classification or reclassification from CAPEX to OPEX and vice versa and any documents or advice relating to the reasons for any reclassifications, including but not limited to advice from the Australian Tax Office, the Australian National Audit Office and the ANU auditors.
• Senator David Pocock to move on the next day of sitting:
• That the Senate --
• (a) notes:
• (i) the review into public sector board appointment processes was commissioned to ensure appointments to government boards were made on merit,
• (ii) that on 23 July 2025, the Senate ordered the Minister for the Public Service to produce the final report of the public sector board appointments processes, and
• (iii) the minister has refused to comply with order for the production of documents no. 10, stating that the document has been prepared for Cabinet deliberation and is therefore protected by Cabinet confidentiality;
• Odgers' Australian Senate Practice (b) rejects the claim made by the minister, and notes the guidance of that claims of Cabinet confidentiality should relate only to the deliberations of Cabinet itself and not every document that merely has a connection to Cabinet; and
• (c) orders that the report be laid on the table by the Minister for the Public Service, by no later than 10 am on 25 August 2025.
• Senator Lambie to move on 26 August 2025:
• Darwin That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, by no later than 12.15 pm on 28 August 2025, the final report of the HMAS Man Overboard Board of Inquiry LS Gurr.

• Selection Of Bills Committee 13 min [2]
  • Report 13 min [6]
    • Tony Sheldon, New South Wales, ALP, 11:14 [126]
      • New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 11:14 Hansard ( -- ) (): I present the fourth report of 2025 of the Selection of Bills Committee, and I seek leave to have the report incorporated in .
      • Leave granted.
      • The report read as follows --
      • REPORT NO. 4 OF 2025
      • 31 July 2025
      • MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
      • Senator Tony Sheldon (Government Whip, Chair) Senator Wendy Askew (Opposition Whip)
      • Senator Pauline Hanson (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip) Senator Nick McKim (Australian Greens Whip)
      • Senator Ralph Babet Senator Leah Blyth
      • Senator the Hon. Anthony Chisholm Senator Jessica Collins
      • Senator the Hon. Katy Gallagher Senator Susan McDonald Senator Fatima Payman
      • Senator David Pocock
      • Secretary: Tim Bryant 02 6277 3020
      • REPORT NO. 4 OF 2025
      • 1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 30 July 2025 at 7.18pm.
      • 1. The committee recommends that --
      • provisions referred immediately (a) the of the Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 and the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 be to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025 (see appendix 1 for statements of reasons for referral);
      • provisions referred immediately (b) the of the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 be to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025; and
      • provisions referred immediately (c) the of the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 be to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025 (see appendix 2 for statements of reasons for referral).
      • not 3. The committee recommends that the following bills be referred to committees:
      • Commonwealth Workplace Protection Orders Bill 2025
      • Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
      • Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025
      • Great Australian Bight (World Heritage Protection) Bill 2025
      • National Health Amendment (Cheaper Medicines) Bill 2025.
      • 1. The committee deferred consideration of the following bills to its next meeting:
      • Australian Education Legislation Amendment (Prohibiting the Indoctrination of Children) Bill 2020
      • Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025
      • Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025
      • Broadcasting Services Amendment (Audio Description) Bill 2019
      • Constitution Alteration (Right to Free Speech) 2025
      • Copyright Legislation Amendment (Fair Pay for Radio Play) Bill 2023
      • Crimes Amendment (Repeal Mandatory Minimum Sentences) Bill 2025
      • Customs Legislation Amendment (Commercial Greyhound Export and Import Prohibition) Bill 2021
      • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Communications) Bill 2025
      • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair Territory Representation) Bill 2024
      • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fairer Contracts and Grants) Bill 2023
      • Electoral Legislation Amendment (Lowering the Voting Age) Bill 2023
      • Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) Bill 2022
      • Fair Work Amendment (Paid Reproductive Health Leave and Flexible Work Arrangements) Bill 2025
      • Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) Bill 2025
      • Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024
      • Interactive Gambling Amendment (Ban Gambling Ads) Bill 2024
      • Landholders' Right to Refuse (Gas and Coal) Bill 2015
      • Lobbying (Improving Government Honesty and Trust) Bill 2025
      • National Housing and Homelessness Plan Bill 2024
      • Parliamentary Joint Committee on Public Consultancy and Services Contracts Bill 2025
      • Right to Protest Bill 2025
      • Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Amendment (Frontline Emergency Service Workers) Bill 2025
      • Treasury Laws Amendment (Payments System Modernisation) Bill 2025.
      • 1. The committee considered the following bills but was unable to reach agreement:
      • Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025
      • Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025.
      • (Tony Sheldon)
      • Chair 31 July 2025
      • Appendix 1
      • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
      • Name of bill:
      • Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025
      • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
      • To scrutinise this legislation
      • Possible submissions or evidence from:
      • Interested parties and stakeholders
      • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
      • Community Affairs Legislation Committee
      • Possible hearing date(s):
      • August
      • Possible reporting date:
      • 21 August 2025
      • (signed)
      • Senator Wendy Askew
      • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
      • Name of bill:
      • Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025
      • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
      • To scrutinise this legislation
      • Possible submissions or evidence from:
      • Interested parties and stakeholders
      • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
      • Community Affairs Legislation Committee
      • Possible hearing date(s):
      • August
      • Possible reporting date:
      • 21 August 2025
      • (signed)
      • Senator Wendy Askew
      • Appendix 2
      • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
      • Name of bill:
      • Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
      • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
      • To scrutinise this legislation
      • Possible submissions or evidence from:
      • Interested parties and stakeholders
      • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
      • Economics Legislation Committee
      • Possible hearing date(s):
      • August
      • Possible reporting date:
      • 21 August 2025
      • (signed)
      • Senator Wendy Askew
      • Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
      • Name of bill:
      • Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025
      • Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
      • to provide relevant stakeholders with an opportunity to provide feedback on the Bill.
      • Possible submissions or evidence from:
      • South Pacific and Australian banks.
      • Committee to which bill is to be referred:
      • Economics Legislation Committee
      • Possible hearing date(s):
      • hearing on the papers
      • Possible reporting date:
      • 21 August 2025
      • (signed)
      • Senator Nick McKim
      • I move:
      • That the report be adopted.
      • Continue / Tony Sheldon, New South Wales, ALP
    • Jess Walsh, Victoria, ALP, 11:14 1 min [6]
      • Victoria Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth 11:14 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • At the end of the motion, add: "and the following bills not be referred to a committee:
      • (a) Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025;
      • (b) Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025
      • (c) Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025; and
      • (d) Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025.
    • David Shoebridge, New South Wales, AG, 11:15 12 min [21]
      • New South Wales 11:15 () (): At the request of Senator McKim, I move the following amendment to Labor's amendment in the terms circulated in the chamber:
      • Omit paragraphs (c) and (d), substitute "and:
      • (c) the provisions of the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 be referred immediately to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October 2025; and
      • (d) the provisions of the Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October 2025".
      • The amendment that we are moving provides that the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 be referred immediately to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October. We're also seeking that the Orwellian named Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025 not go to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security
      • the Labor-coalition stitch-up, but instead go to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. We'd really like to take at least one of those secret security bills out of that dark, smoke-filled room of the war parties and instead put it to a public inquiry -- particularly this bill, which is proposing to give the PJCIS even more powers for their secret review of intelligence.
      • But I really want to dwell on the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025. You can't make some stuff up in politics, but what about this? In the last parliament, we saw Labor coming up with a million reasons they couldn't do anything on public housing. They couldn't help people out on rents, they couldn't build public housing, and they kept saying it was all the Greens' fault for not supporting their crap bills. Then, in this parliament, they start with a public housing bill. Well done, Labor! You bring a public housing bill into the chamber. You push it through the lower house. And do you know what public housing they're building? They're building public housing for US troops under AUKUS. That's their public housing bill.
      • Right now, they want to build 700 public housing units over in WA -- not for Australians who haven't got a place to live and not for renters who can't afford to buy a home. They're building public housing for US troops because Uncle Donald asked them to. Surely they read this bill, didn't they? Didn't somebody in the Labor caucus say, 'Our first public housing bill in the new parliament can't be to build housing for US troops under AUKUS'? Surely someone did a reality check. But no. That's their bill. And do you know what? They can't even say how many hundreds of millions of public dollars will be used to build public housing for US troops under the bill.
      • Even the coalition were asking some questions about it. The coalition normally wave through anything to do with AUKUS. If it's anything to do with the US alliance, they'll wave it through. But even the coalition downstairs asked some little, quiet, tentative questions like: 'Please, sir, can you tell us how much money we're going to be paying to build the US troops public housing? Please, minister, you haven't explained in the bill how much this is going to cost; is it going to come from the Defence budget or some other budget?' When the coalition got no answers, they crawled back into their shell and went quiet on it. And that's so typical of this non-opposition opposition --
      • Senator Scarr?
      • A point of order on the language being used by Senator Shoebridge. Senator Shoebridge can do better than using language like 'crawl'. Yesterday, we had 'crunch' from the other side.
      • Thank you, Senator Scarr. That's quite enough on your point of order. It's not unparliamentary language, but I would suggest that all senators and Senator Shoebridge can do better.
      • Thank you, President. Maybe the problem is the 'Uncle Donald' reference. Maybe it's that the coalition and Labor are embarrassed about the fact that they're teaming up today to help the Senate ram through legislation to build public housing for US troops under AUKUS. It is a bloody disgrace.
      • Senator Shoebridge --
      • I withdraw that.
      • Thank you.
      • There are already 212 thousand US marines cycling in and out of Darwin. Are we building housing for the 212 thousand marines cycling in and out of Darwin? There are already plans to put 700 US troops into the surrounds of Garden Island, off Fremantle, with all their families. How many houses are we building for US troops in Fremantle under this bill? There's already a housing crisis over there.
      • We say to both the coalition and Labor: if you're going to do another stitch-up on AUKUS, at least have the guts to do it in public. At least have the guts to take this bill to an inquiry so we can find out how many hundreds of millions in Australian taxpayers' dollars are going towards building housing for US troops under the plan from the war parties, Labor and the coalition. AUKUS is already bleeding us dry, with billions of dollars going to Donald Trump and billions more going to Rolls-Royce in the UK. And now, in the first housing bill that Labor brings into this new parliament, they decide to put an unknown number of millions of dollars into building houses -- not for people in Australia who can't afford them, but for Labor's mates in the US and for US troops. It's a disgrace. Send it to inquiry.
      • The question is that the Greens amendment as moved by Senator Shoebridge, and standing in the name of Senator McKim, to the amendment moved by Senator Walsh be agreed to.
      • Interjection [6]
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Continue [3]
        • David Shoebridge, New South Wales, AG
        • David Shoebridge, New South Wales, AG
        • David Shoebridge, New South Wales, AG
    • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 11:27 [3]
      • 11:27 (): The question now is that the amendment to the motion that the Selection of Bills Committee report be adopted, moved by Senator Walsh, be agreed to.
      • Question agreed to.
      • Original question, as amended, agreed to.
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Report
      • Speaker Count: 4
      • Speakers: Tony Sheldon (ALP); Jess Walsh (ALP); David Shoebridge (AG); Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP)
      • Rational Thought Positives: Tony Sheldon (ALP): source-backed reasoning: "2. The committee recommends that -- provisions referred immediately (a) the of the Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 and the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 be to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025 (see appendix 1 for statements of reasons for referral); provisions referred immediately (b) the of the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 be to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025; and provisions referred immediately (c) the of the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 be to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 21 August 2025 (see appendix 2 for statements of reasons for referral). not 3."; David Shoebridge (AG): source-backed reasoning: "The amendment that we are moving provides that the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 be referred immediately to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October."; David Shoebridge (AG): source-backed reasoning: "We're also seeking that the Orwellian named Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025 not go to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security the Labor-coalition stitch-up, but instead go to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. We'd really like to take at least one of those secret security bills out of that dark, smoke-filled room of the war parties and instead put it to a public inquiry -- particularly this bill, which is proposing to give the PJCIS even more powers for their secret review of intelligence."
      • Speaker Response Positives: David Shoebridge (AG): explicit response signal: "Thank you, Senator Scarr."; David Shoebridge (AG): responded to Jess Walsh (ALP): "The question is that the Greens amendment as moved by Senator Shoebridge, and standing in the name of Senator McKim, to the amendment moved by Senator Walsh be agreed to."; Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP): responded to Jess Walsh (ALP): "11:27 (): The question now is that the amendment to the motion that the Selection of Bills Committee report be adopted, moved by Senator Walsh, be agreed to."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
    • Division [5]
      • The Senate divided. 11:25
      • Ayes 13 [13]
        • Allman-Payne, P. J.
        • Faruqi, M.
        • Hanson-Young, S. C.
        • Hodgins-May, S.
        • McKim, N. J. (Teller)
        • Payman, F.
        • Pocock, B.
        • Pocock, D. W.
        • Shoebridge, D. M.
        • Steele-John, J. A.
        • Tyrrell, T. M.
        • Waters, L. J.
        • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Noes 31 [31]
        • Ananda-Rajah, M.
        • Askew, W. (Teller)
        • Babet, R. D.
        • Brown, C. L.
        • Ciccone, R.
        • Cox, D.
        • Darmanin, L.
        • Dolega, J.
        • Dowling, R.
        • Duniam, J. R.
        • Gallagher, K. R.
        • Ghosh, V.
        • Green, N. L.
        • Grogan, K.
        • Lines, S.
        • McAllister, J. R.
        • Mulholland, C.
        • O'Neill, D. M.
        • Polley, H.
        • Roberts, M. I.
        • Ruston, A.
        • Scarr, P. M.
        • Sheldon, A. V.
        • Smith, M. F.
        • Stacey, W.
        • Stewart, J. N. A.
        • Walker, C.
        • Walsh, J. C.
        • Watt, M. P.
        • Whiteaker, E.
        • Whitten, T.
      • Pairs 0
      • Question negatived.

• Rearrangement / Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 11:28 [3]
  • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 11:28 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That general business notice of motion No. 73 standing in the name of Senator Ruston, relating to Medicare, be considered during general business today.
  • Question agreed to.
• Leave Of Absence / Tony Sheldon, New South Wales, ALP, 11:28 [5]
  • New South Wales Chief Government Whip in the Senate 11:28 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move:
  • That leave of absence be granted to the following senators for today:
  • (a) Senator McCarthy, on account of ministerial business; and
  • (b) Senator Sterle, on account of parliamentary business.
  • Question agreed to.
• Leave Of Absence / Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 11:28 [3]
  • Queensland 11:28 () (): by leave -- I move:
  • That leave of absence be granted to Senator Hanson for today, for personal reasons.
  • Question agreed to.
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Business
  • Speaker Count: 3
  • Speakers: Rearrangement / Katy Gallagher (ALP); Leave Of Absence / Tony Sheldon (ALP); Leave Of Absence / Malcolm Roberts (PHON)
  • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.

• Postponement
• The Clerk: Postponement notifications have been lodged in respect of the following:
• No. 34 (Senator Shoebridge), till 25 August 2025.
• Nos 62 and 63 (Senator Thorpe), till 25 August 2025.
• No. 70 (Senator Hanson-Young), till 25 August 2025.

• Rural And Regional Affairs And Transport References Committee 7 min [2]
  • Reference 4 min [2]
    • Wendy Askew, Tasmania, LP, 11:30 4 min [13]
      • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 11:30 ( -- ) (): At the request of Senator Canavan, I move:
      • That the following matter be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 30 October 2025:
      • The Australian Government's decision to allow United States of America beef derived from bovines born and raised in North and Central America to be imported into Australia, with particular reference to:
      • (a) the possible impending threat of importing beef products from cattle herds in North and Central America which have been, or may be, exposed to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) or other serious cattle borne diseases;
      • (b) the processes undertaken by the Australian Government in determining biosecurity risk to consumers and industry, and the adequacy of such processes;
      • (c) the adequacy of the biosecurity import risk assessment, associated processes and advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in relation to importing beef and beef products from the United States of America (USA);
      • (d) the implication of future possible BSE and FMD outbreaks in the USA or other relevant countries on biosecurity assurances in Australia;
      • (e) the protocols that would apply to beef products imported from the USA and equivalency in standards;
      • (f) the Inspector-General of Biosecurity's review of the management and application of the import risk analysis process and recommendations;
      • (g) the possible implications of allowing imports from the USA for Australia's international and domestic reputation as the world's safest producer of beef; and
      • (h) any other related matters.
      • The question is that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1, standing in the name of Senator Canavan, be agreed to.
      • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Division [5]
      • The Senate divided. 11:34
      • Ayes 27 [27]
        • Antic, A.
        • Askew, W. (Teller)
        • Babet, R. D.
        • Blyth, L.
        • Bragg, A. J.
        • Brockman, W. E.
        • Canavan, M. J.
        • Chandler, C.
        • Collins, J.
        • Duniam, J. R.
        • Henderson, S. M.
        • Kovacic, M.
        • Liddle, K. J.
        • McDonald, S. E.
        • McLachlan, A. L.
        • O'Sullivan, M. A.
        • Paterson, J. W.
        • Payman, F.
        • Pocock, D. W.
        • Roberts, M. I.
        • Ruston, A.
        • Scarr, P. M.
        • Sharma, D. N.
        • Smith, D. A.
        • Stacey, W.
        • Tyrrell, T. M.
        • Whitten, T.
      • Noes 33 [33]
        • Allman-Payne, P. J.
        • Ananda-Rajah, M.
        • Ayres, T.
        • Brown, C. L.
        • Ciccone, R.
        • Cox, D.
        • Darmanin, L.
        • Dolega, J.
        • Dowling, R.
        • Faruqi, M.
        • Gallagher, K. R.
        • Ghosh, V.
        • Green, N. L.
        • Grogan, K.
        • Hanson-Young, S. C.
        • Hodgins-May, S.
        • Lines, S.
        • McAllister, J. R.
        • McKim, N. J.
        • Mulholland, C.
        • O'Neill, D. M.
        • Pocock, B.
        • Polley, H.
        • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
        • Shoebridge, D. M.
        • Smith, M. F.
        • Steele-John, J. A.
        • Stewart, J. N. A.
        • Walker, C.
        • Waters, L. J.
        • Watt, M. P.
        • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
        • Whiteaker, E.
      • Pairs 6 [12]
        • Cadell, R. P.
        • McCarthy, M.
        • Cash, M. C.
        • Wong, P.
        • Hume, J.
        • Sterle, G.
        • McGrath, J. A.
        • Walsh, J. C.
        • McKenzie, B. G.
        • Farrell, D. E.
        • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
        • Chisholm, A. D.
      • Question negatived.
• Environment And Communications References Committee 10 min [5]
  • Reference 5 min [3]
    • Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG, 11:37 [10]
      • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 11:37 ( -- ) (): I move:
      • (1) That the following matter be re-referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 June 2026:
      • Greenwashing, with particular reference to:
      • (a) the environmental and sustainability claims made by companies in industries including energy, vehicles, household products and appliances, food and drink packaging, cosmetics, clothing and footwear;
      • (b) the impact of misleading environmental and sustainability claims on consumers;
      • (c) domestic and international examples of regulating companies' environmental and sustainability claims;
      • (d) advertising standards in relation to environmental and sustainability claims;
      • (e) legislative options to protect consumers from greenwashing in Australia; and
      • (f) any other related matters.
      • (2) That the committee have the power to consider and use the records of the Environment and Communications References Committee appointed in the previous parliament.
    • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP, 11:37 [6]
      • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 11:37 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
      • Leave is granted for one minute.
      • Given what happened in relation to the last motion, where Labor and the Greens combined to crunch the coalition and deprive the committee of considering a matter of great importance to the Australian people, the coalition will be taking a stand on this motion and opposing it. We believe that the dealings between the Greens and the Labor Party are compromising the running of this institution to consider matters of great concern to the Australian people, including in relation to the announcement made regarding the importation of beef from the United States, which has its source in both Canada and Mexico. So we will resist Labor and the Greens seeking to crunch the coalition, and seeking to thereby crunch the operation of this institution, and we will oppose.
      • The question is that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 3, standing in the name of Senator Hanson-Young, be agreed to.
      • Interjection [2]
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
        • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Continue / Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
    • Single Subject Exchange
      • Analysis Fragment
      • Exchange Subject: Reference
      • Speaker Count: 2
      • Speakers: Sarah Hanson-Young (AG); Paul Scarr (LP)
      • Speaker Response Positives: Paul Scarr (LP): responded to Sarah Hanson-Young (AG): "3, standing in the name of Senator Hanson-Young, be agreed to."
      • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
  • Reference / Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australia, AG, 11:42 1 min [6]
    • South Australia Manager of Australian Greens Business in the Senate 11:42 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • (1) That the following matters be re-referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 June 2026:
    • (a) the National Cultural Policy released on 30 January 2023; and
    • (b) any other related matters.
    • (2) That the committee have the power to consider and use the records of the Environment and Communications References Committee appointed in the previous parliament.
    • Question agreed to.
  • Reference / Ralph Babet, Victoria, UAP, 11:43 [10]
    • Victoria United Australia Party Whip 11:43 ( -- ) (): I, and also on behalf of Senator Roberts, move:
    • That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 31 October 2025:
    • The Internet Search Engine Services Online Safety Code (Class 1C and Class 2 Material), with particular reference to:
    • Online Safety Act 2021 (a) the heads of authority provided by the (the Act) for each provision of the code;
    • (b) the scope and accountability of the e-Safety Commissioner in administering the Act including the development of industry codes and standards;
    • (c) ensuring there are appropriate parliamentary oversight and scrutiny mechanisms for industry codes and standards;
    • (d) the operation of similar legislation in the United Kingdom and Europe as it relates to freedom of speech and freedom of the press; and
    • (e) any other related matters.
    • The question is that general business of the Senate notice of motion No. 5, standing in the names of Senators Babet and Roberts, be agreed to.
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Environment And Communications References Committee
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Reference / Sarah Hanson-Young (AG); Reference / Ralph Babet (UAP)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Reference / Ralph Babet (UAP): source-backed reasoning: "Victoria United Australia Party Whip 11:43 ( -- ) (): I, and also on behalf of Senator Roberts, move: That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 31 October 2025: The Internet Search Engine Services Online Safety Code (Class 1C and Class 2 Material), with particular reference to: Online Safety Act 2021 (a) the heads of authority provided by the (the Act) for each provision of the code; (b) the scope and accountability of the e-Safety Commissioner in administering the Act including the development of industry codes and standards; (c) ensuring there are appropriate parliamentary oversight and scrutiny mechanisms for industry codes and standards; (d) the operation of similar legislation in the United Kingdom and Europe as it relates to freedom of speech and freedom of the press; and (e) any other related matters."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
• Public Works Joint Committee [2]
  • Reference / Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 11:47 [8]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 11:47 ( -- ) (): I move:
    • Public Works Committee Act 1969 That
    • in accordance with the provisions of the, the following proposed works be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for consideration and report as expeditiously as is practicable:
    • Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts -- Proposed fit-out of new leased premises at 7 London Circuit, Canberra City.
    • Airservices Australia -- PFAS remediation of the former fire training ground at Rockhampton Airport, Queensland.
    • Airservices Australia -- Aviation rescue fire fighting services NexGen project for the end-of-life facilities upgrades -- Phase 1A (Queensland and Victoria).
    • I table statements in relation to the works.
    • Question agreed to.
• Productivity In Australia Select Committee / Appointment 3 min [4]
  • Wendy Askew, Tasmania, LP, 11:47 1 min [33]
    • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 11:47 ( -- ) (): At the request of Senator Bragg, I move:
    • (1) That a select committee
    • to be known as the Select Committee on Productivity in Australia, be established to inquire into and report on:
    • (a) the history of productivity growth in Australia in both multifactor and labour terms;
    • (b) the current position and opportunities to gain productivity growth;
    • (c) conflicts of interest and structural barriers to sustainable growth;
    • (d) the efficacy of federal competition law;
    • (e) opportunities for the states and territories to drive growth;
    • (f) the impact of regulatory tax burdens on productivity growth;
    • (g) the impact and opportunity of technology;
    • (h) priority opportunities in the market and non-market sectors for productivity growth;
    • (i) Australia's competitiveness and benchmarking against similar nations; and
    • (j) any other related matters.
    • (2) That the committee present its final report by 23 July 2027.
    • (3) That the committee consist of 6 senators, as follows:
    • (a) two nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;
    • (b) two nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate; and
    • (c) two nominated by minority party or independent senators.
    • (4) That:
    • (a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator;
    • (b) participating members may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee
    • and have all the rights of members of the committee
    • but may not vote on any questions before the committee; and
    • (c) a participating member shall be taken to be a member of a committee for the purpose of forming a quorum of the committee if a majority of members of the committee is not present.
    • (5) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that all members have not been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.
    • (6) That the committee elect as chair a member nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and, as deputy chair, a member nominated by Leader of the Government in the Senate.
    • (7) That the deputy chair shall act as chair when the chair is absent from a meeting of the committee, or the position of chair is temporarily vacant.
    • (8) That the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, may appoint another member of the committee to act as chair during the temporary absence of both the chair and deputy chair at a meeting of the committee.
    • (9) That, in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.
    • (10) That the committee, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.
    • (11) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff
    • facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President.
    • (12) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in public.
  • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 11:48 2 min [7]
    • Queensland 11:48 () (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
    • Leave is granted for one minute.
    • It's an unfortunate irony that an inquiry into productivity is asking for such an extended timeline to deliver findings -- two years. One Nation would happily support an inquiry into productivity on a much shorter, more productive timeline -- six months. We note that all inquiries are entitled to seek extensions of time from the Senate if needed, and this is common.
    • This government is murdering productivity, particularly with skyrocketing energy prices and regulations crippling productivity. With more to come, it makes productivity improvement urgent. Productivity determines standard of living, national prosperity and security, and can drive real wage growth. One Nation will oppose this motion, and we repeat through you, President, to Senator Bragg that we welcome him returning with a motion for an inquiry of six months duration.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 15 standing in the name of Senator Bragg and moved by Senator Askew be agreed to.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Productivity In Australia Select Committee / Appointment
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Wendy Askew (LP); Malcolm Roberts (PHON)
    • Rational Thought Positives: Wendy Askew (LP): source-backed reasoning: "(2) That the committee present its final report by 23 July 2027."; Wendy Askew (LP): source-backed reasoning: "(9) That, in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote. (10) That the committee, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit."
    • Speaker Response Positives: Malcolm Roberts (PHON): responded to Wendy Askew (LP): "15 standing in the name of Senator Bragg and moved by Senator Askew be agreed to."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:50
    • Ayes 23 [23]
      • Antic, A.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Bragg, A. J.
      • Brockman, W. E.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Chandler, C.
      • Collins, J.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Henderson, S. M.
      • Kovacic, M.
      • Liddle, K. J.
      • McDonald, S. E.
      • McLachlan, A. L.
      • O'Sullivan, M. A.
      • Paterson, J. W.
      • Payman, F.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sharma, D. N.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
    • Noes 37 [37]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Ayres, T.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Polley, H.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Whiteaker, E.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Pairs 6 [12]
      • Cadell, R. P.
      • McCarthy, M.
      • Cash, M. C.
      • Wong, P.
      • Hume, J.
      • Sterle, G.
      • McGrath, J. A.
      • Walsh, J. C.
      • McKenzie, B. G.
      • Farrell, D. E.
      • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
      • Chisholm, A. D.
    • Question negatived.

• Middle East / Order For The Production Of Documents 4 min [4]
  • Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 11:53 [31]
    • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 11:53 ( -- ) (): I move general business notices of motion Nos 53 to 55 together:
    • GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 53
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Attorney-General by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 21 August 2025:
    • (a) the complete text of any legal advice obtained or prepared concerning Australia's compliance with its obligations under international law relating to:
    • (i) genocide and the prevention of genocide, and/or
    • (ii) the occupied Palestinian territories, including decisions of United Nations bodies and the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, dated 19 July 2024;
    • (b) the facts that went into preparing any legal advice;
    • (c) identification of the individual or entity who prepared the legal advice;
    • (d) dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised;
    • (e) a list of all government officials and departments to whom the advice has been provided; and/or
    • (f) all written or digital correspondence (including all attachments to any written or digital correspondence), briefing materials, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records concerning any such legal advice.
    • GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 54
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Foreign Affairs by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 21 August 2025:
    • (a) the complete text of any legal advice obtained or prepared concerning Australia's compliance with its obligations under international law relating to:
    • (i) genocide and the prevention of genocide, and/or
    • (ii) the occupied Palestinian territories, including decisions of United Nations bodies and the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, dated 19 July 2024;
    • (b) the facts that went into preparing any legal advice;
    • (c) identification of the individual or entity who prepared the legal advice;
    • (d) dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised; and/or
    • (e) a list of all government officials and departments to whom the advice has been provided; and/or
    • (f) all written or digital correspondence (including all attachments to any written or digital correspondence), briefing materials, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records concerning any such legal advice.
    • GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 55
    • That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 21 August 2025:
    • (a) the complete text of any legal advice obtained or prepared concerning Australia's compliance with its obligations under international law relating to:
    • (i) genocide and the prevention of genocide, and/or
    • (ii) the occupied Palestinian territories, including decisions of United Nations bodies and the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, dated 19 July 2024;
    • (b) the facts that went into preparing any such legal advice;
    • (c) identification of the individual or entity who prepared the legal advice;
    • (d) dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised;
    • (e) a list of all government officials and departments to whom the advice has been provided; and/or
    • (f) all written or digital correspondence (including all attachments to any written or digital correspondence), briefing materials, file notes, meeting notices or minutes or other records concerning any such legal advice.
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 11:53 2 min [6]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 11:53 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement in relation to general business notices of motion Nos 53, 54 and 55.
    • Leave is granted for one minute.
    • The government will be opposing these motions. Australia acts in accordance with our obligations under international law. Throughout the war in Gaza, the government has been consistent in our demand that all parties must abide by international humanitarian law. Australia has long been part of an international call on Israel to comply with its international obligations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We have repeatedly called on Israel to comply with the binding orders of the International Court of Justice, including its provisional orders in South Africa's case against Israel. We work with partners to assert our position through sanctions, statements and resolutions, as well as diplomatic interventions and more than $110 million in humanitarian assistance for civilians devastated by the conflict. Consistent with the longstanding practice of successive Australian governments, the government does not disclose the details of any legal advice sought or received.
    • The question is that general business notices of motion Nos 53 to 55 be agreed to.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Middle East / Order For The Production Of Documents
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Lidia Thorpe (IND); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
    • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:55
    • Ayes 14 [14]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Thorpe, L. A. (Teller)
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
    • Noes 34 [34]
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Ayres, T.
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Polley, H.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sheldon, A. V.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whiteaker, E.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Pairs 0
    • Question negatived.
• Remote Australia Employment Service / Order For The Production Of Documents / Lidia Thorpe, Victoria, IND, 11:57 1 min [9]
  • Victoria Independent VIC Whip 11:57 ( -- ) (): I move:
  • That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Indigenous Australians, by 5 pm on 12 August 2025:
  • Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (a) the text of any legal advice obtained or prepared by the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA), the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) or the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PMC) regarding the compliance of the Remote Australia Employment Service (RAES), previously referred to as the New Remote Employment Services Program (N-RES), or any related other remote employment services scheme with the (the Act), or the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) as referred to in the response to question on notice no. 322 from the 2024-25 Supplementary Budget estimates cross-portfolio Indigenous matters hearings of the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee, including:
  • (i) the dates on which the advice was commissioned, prepared and finalised, and
  • (ii) a list of all government officials, departments or agencies to whom the advice has been provided;
  • (b) any written communications, including emails, briefings or internal correspondence, between NIAA, PMC, DEWR or any other Commonwealth agency concerning the program's compliance with the Act or ICERD;
  • (c) the most up to date version of any grant opportunity guidelines, implementation instructions or internal decision-making rules relating to the design or rollout of the RAES, N-RES or related schemes, where such documents reflect or were informed by legal advice on compliance with the RDA or ICERD; and
  • (d) all documents and communications described above that were created, commissioned or circulated since 1 January 2023.
  • Question agreed to.
• National Disability Insurance Scheme / Order For The Production Of Documents 1 min [2]
  • Wendy Askew, Tasmania, LP, 11:58 1 min [8]
    • Tasmania Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate 11:58 ( -- ) (): At the request of Senator Ruston, I move:
    • That --
    • (a) the Senate notes that on 29 July 2025 the Senate agreed that it does not consider that orders for the production of documents nos 229, 253 and 315 relating to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Financial Sustainability Framework have been satisfactorily complied with; and
    • (b) until the Senate resolves that the orders have been satisfactorily complied with, the Minister representing the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme be required to attend the Senate at the start of proceedings on the first day of each sitting week to provide an explanation of the failure to comply with the orders, and that:
    • (i) any senator may move to take note of the explanation, and
    • (ii) any such motion may be debated for no longer than 30 minutes, shall have precedence over all other business until determined, and senators may speak to the motion for not more than 5 minutes each.
    • The question is that general business notice of motion No. 67, standing in the name of Senator Ruston and moved by Senator Askew, be agreed to.
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 11:59
    • Ayes 28 [28]
      • Antic, A.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Bragg, A. J.
      • Brockman, W. E.
      • Cadell, R. P.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Chandler, C.
      • Collins, J.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Henderson, S. M.
      • Kovacic, M.
      • Liddle, K. J.
      • McDonald, S. E.
      • McLachlan, A. L.
      • O'Sullivan, M. A.
      • Paterson, J. W.
      • Payman, F.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sharma, D. N.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Noes 34 [34]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Ayres, T.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K.
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Polley, H.
      • Sheldon, A. V. (Teller)
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Thorpe, L. A.
      • Walker, C.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Whiteaker, E.
    • Pairs 0
    • Question negatived.

• First Reading 8 min [7]
  • Alex Antic, South Australia, LP, 12:03 [7]
    • South Australia 12:03 () (): I, and also on behalf of Senator Canavan, move:
    • That the following bill be introduced:
    • Sex Discrimination Act 1984 A Bill for an Act to amend the , and for related purposes.
    • Question agreed to.
    • I present the bill and move:
    • That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
    • Continue / Alex Antic, South Australia, LP
  • Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP, 12:03 1 min [5]
    • Queensland Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate 12:03 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
    • Leave is granted for one minute.
    • While the Senate has the opportunity to reject a bill at the first reading stage, in practice, the first reading is almost always passed without opposition and is regarded as a purely formal stage. The coalition support these normal procedures as we have with many Greens, Labor or crossbench bills that we strongly opposed. The normal process enables bills to be fairly considered and debated by the Senate before a substantive decision is taken. It should only be deviated from in the most extreme of circumstances, lest we deny the right of senators to even have matters debated. As in all cases, a vote on the first reading should not be taken as a position on the substantive legislation, especially where a bill has not had the opportunity to be the subject of normal internal processes.
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Paul Scarr, Queensland, LP
  • Nick McKim, Tasmania, AG, 12:04 1 min [4]
    • Tasmania Australian Greens Whip 12:04 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a one-minute statement.
    • Leave granted.
    • I thank the Senate. We know exactly what Senators Antic and Canavan are up to here. They are introducing a bill that they want to use to provide a platform for transphobic people in our community to punch down on transgender Australians and, in particular, on trans kids. That's what's going on here -- they are trying to provide a platform, using parliamentary privilege, to punch down on some of the most vulnerable people in our community. Well, as far as the Australian Greens are concerned, we are never, never going to vote in this place to allow you to create that platform. Trans rights are human rights! Trans people and trans kids deserve our love and support. They deserve us to stand up and defend their right to exist, and the Australian Greens will always do that.
    • Continue / Nick McKim, Tasmania, AG
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 12:05 2 min [5]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 12:05 ( -- ) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
    • Leave is granted for one minute.
    • I understand the arguments that Senator Scarr has put and agree that it is normal custom and practice in this place to allow for bills to be introduced. However, in the last term the government did take a stand on another similar bill. We took the position that we were dealing with it at the first reading stage because of the harm that could be caused by creating a platform for parliamentary debate over it and its impact on individuals -- particularly young Australians. That is the position we took in the last parliament. It is the position we are taking now. We do not agree with the Senate being a place where individual harm can be done to young people across this country. That is what would have happened had we allowed this bill to proceed in the normal course, and we won't stand for it. Trans children deserve better from this chamber.
    • Interjection / Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP
  • Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON, 12:07 4 min [6]
    • Queensland 12:07 () (): I seek leave to make a short statement.
    • Leave is granted for one minute.
    • What we're seeing here is an example of control, and, always, beneath control there is fear. Of what are the Greens and their coalition partner, Labor, afraid?
    • The question is that general business notion of motion No. 68 standing in the name of Senators Antic and Canavan be agreed to.
    • Interjection [2]
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
      • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
    • Continue / Malcolm Roberts, Queensland, PHON
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: First Reading
    • Speaker Count: 5
    • Speakers: Alex Antic (LP); Paul Scarr (LP); Nick McKim (AG); Katy Gallagher (ALP); Malcolm Roberts (PHON)
    • Speaker Response Positives: Nick McKim (AG): responded to Alex Antic (LP): "We know exactly what Senators Antic and Canavan are up to here."; Katy Gallagher (ALP): responded to Paul Scarr (LP): "I understand the arguments that Senator Scarr has put and agree that it is normal custom and practice in this place to allow for bills to be introduced."; Malcolm Roberts (PHON): responded to Alex Antic (LP): "68 standing in the name of Senators Antic and Canavan be agreed to."
    • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.
  • Division [5]
    • The Senate divided. 12:11
    • Ayes 25 [25]
      • Antic, A.
      • Askew, W. (Teller)
      • Babet, R. D.
      • Blyth, L.
      • Bragg, A. J.
      • Brockman, W. E.
      • Cadell, R. P.
      • Canavan, M. J.
      • Chandler, C.
      • Collins, J.
      • Duniam, J. R.
      • Henderson, S. M.
      • Kovacic, M.
      • Liddle, K. J.
      • McDonald, S. E.
      • McLachlan, A. L.
      • O'Sullivan, M. A.
      • Paterson, J. W.
      • Roberts, M. I.
      • Ruston, A.
      • Scarr, P. M.
      • Sharma, D. N.
      • Smith, D. A.
      • Stacey, W.
      • Whitten, T.
    • Noes 36 [36]
      • Allman-Payne, P. J.
      • Ananda-Rajah, M.
      • Ayres, T.
      • Brown, C. L.
      • Ciccone, R.
      • Cox, D.
      • Darmanin, L.
      • Dolega, J.
      • Dowling, R.
      • Faruqi, M.
      • Gallagher, K. R.
      • Ghosh, V.
      • Green, N. L.
      • Grogan, K. (Teller)
      • Hanson-Young, S. C.
      • Hodgins-May, S.
      • Lines, S.
      • McAllister, J. R.
      • McKim, N. J.
      • Mulholland, C.
      • O'Neill, D. M.
      • Pocock, B.
      • Pocock, D. W.
      • Polley, H.
      • Sheldon, A. V.
      • Shoebridge, D. M.
      • Smith, M. F.
      • Steele-John, J. A.
      • Stewart, J. N. A.
      • Thorpe, L. A.
      • Tyrrell, T. M.
      • Walker, C.
      • Waters, L. J.
      • Watt, M. P.
      • Whish-Wilson, P. S.
      • Whiteaker, E.
    • Pairs 6 [12]
      • Cash, M. C.
      • Wong, P.
      • Colbeck, R. M.
      • Walsh, J. C.
      • Hume, J.
      • Sterle, G.
      • McGrath, J. A.
      • McCarthy, M.
      • McKenzie, B. G.
      • Farrell, D. E.
      • Nampijinpa Price, J. S.
      • Chisholm, A. D.
    • Question negatived.

• Tasmania Australian Greens Whip 12:14 ( -- ) (): I ask that general business notice of motion No. 69 be taken as a formal notion.
• Is there any objection to this motion being taken as formal?
• Yes, there is.
• There is an objection.
• Pursuant to contingent notice of motion standing in the name of Senator Waters, I move that so much of standing orders --
• We've now hit the hard marker, Senator McKim.
• Interjection [4]
  • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Matthew Canavan, Queensland, NATS
  • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
  • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP
• Continue / Nick McKim, Tasmania, AG

• Appropriations, Staffing And Security Committee
• Electoral Matters Joint Committee
• Implementation Of The National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee
• Information Integrity On Climate Change And Energy -- Select Committee
• Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• Pfas (Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Select Committee
• Appropriations, Staffing and Security Committee Electoral Matters Joint Committee Implementation of the National Redress Scheme -- Joint Committee Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy -- Select Committee Parliamentary Standards Joint Committee
• Membership [3]
  • Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT), Western Australia, ALP, 12:15 [1]
    • 12:15 (): With the indulgence of the Senate, I am going to deal with committee memberships before we get to the address-in-reply. I have received letters nominating senators to be members of committees.
  • Katy Gallagher, Australian Capital Territory, ALP, 12:15 [19]
    • Australian Capital Territory Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate 12:15 ( -- ) (): by leave -- I move:
    • That senators be appointed to committees as follows:
    • Appropriations, Staffing and Security -- Standing Committee --
    • Appointed -- Senators Duniam, McKenzie and Waters
    • Electoral Matters -- Joint Standing Committee --
    • Appointed -- Participating members [for the purposes of the committee's inquiry into the 2025 election]: Senators Allman-Payne, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, McKim, Barbara Pocock, Shoebridge, Steele-John, Waters and Whish-Wilson
    • Implementation of the National Redress Scheme -- Joint Standing Committee --
    • Appointed -- Participating members: Senators Allman-Payne, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, Hodgins-May, McKim, Barbara Pocock, Shoebridge, Steele-John, Waters and Whish-Wilson
    • Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy -- Select Committee --
    • Appointed --
    • Senators Canavan, McLachlan, David Pocock and Whish-Wilson
    • Participating members: Senators Allman-Payne, Antic, Askew, Blyth, Bragg, Brockman, Cadell, Cash, Chandler, Colbeck, Collins, Duniam, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, Henderson, Hodgins-May, Hume, Kovacic, Liddle, McDonald, McGrath, McKenzie, McKim, Nampijinpa Price, O'Sullivan, Paterson, Barbara Pocock, Ruston, Scarr, Sharma, Shoebridge, Dean Smith, Steele-John and Waters
    • Parliamentary Joint Committee on Parliamentary Standards --
    • Appointed -- Senator McKim
    • PFAS -- Select Committee --
    • Appointed --
    • Senator Whish-Wilson
    • Participating members: Senators Allman-Payne, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, Hodgins-May, McKim, Barbara Pocock, Shoebridge, Steele-John and Waters
    • Question agreed to.
  • Single Subject Exchange
    • Analysis Fragment
    • Exchange Subject: Membership
    • Speaker Count: 2
    • Speakers: Sue Lines (The PRESIDENT) (ALP); Katy Gallagher (ALP)
    • Mostly Empty Text: no data-plus-source or direct-response signal detected in this first-pass scan.

• Consideration resumed of the motion:
• That the following address-in-reply be agreed to:
• To Her Excellency the Governor-General
• MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY --
• We, the Senate of the Commonwealth of Australia in Parliament assembled, desire to express our loyalty to our Most Gracious Sovereign and to thank Your Excellency for the speech which you have been pleased to address to Parliament.
• Matt O'Sullivan, Western Australia, LP, 12:16 14 min [21]
  • Western Australia 12:16 () (): Current world events and the destabilisation of our geopolitical climate demonstrate that Australia, despite our challenges, is a resilient and strong democracy. This should never be taken for granted. Having the opportunity to stand in this place today and make this speech after a seamless transition post election proves that we are indeed the greatest country on earth.
  • Entering my second term in the Senate, I've been reflecting on what the past six years threw at us. Obviously, for those that were also in the class of 2019, we didn't have very long in this place until, suddenly, life was far from normal. COVID entered the scene in early 2020, and we were trying to work out what it meant for Australia. Parliament was cancelled, and we spent all that time in isolation. We Western Australians spent a few too many days cooped up in hotel rooms -- or, as it was for me, in a caravan -- after parliamentary sittings. Then came the economic shocks, the supply chain challenges -- we all remember the rush on toilet paper -- the rising inflation, the growing uncertainty in global affairs and the creeping sense that things would never be the same. And we've faced compounding pressures on families, small businesses, budgets and national morale. Yet here we are.
  • I'd like to take this opportunity to acknowledge some of my colleagues who have finished their service in this place and the other place. Firstly, I acknowledge our leader last term, Peter Dutton. Peter was a great support to me, and I'm incredibly grateful to him and his family. The election result was disappointing, but Peter deserves recognition and respect for his almost 25 years as a member of parliament, including as a cabinet minister and, most recently, the Leader of the Opposition.
  • Secondly, I acknowledge my fellow Western Australian, former senator Linda Reynolds. Linda has been such a strong advocate for Western Australian and the coalition. Linda, you can be proud of your contribution and what you achieved in our nation's parliament.
  • I would also like to acknowledge my other colleagues Hollie Hughes, Perin Davey and David Fawcett. Thank you for being such great colleagues and supporters and for all the work that you did in this place. I wish you the very best for what comes next.
  • It is through these reflections that you realise the immense privilege that it is to serve in the Australian parliament. I never want a day to go by without that feeling of great pride. We should never feel entitled or be comfortable in this job, for it is for Western Australians and it is with Western Australians, who have placed their trust in me to represent them and deliver for them.
  • This is a sobering time for the Liberal Party. The results of the past two elections highlight that much has gone wrong. It is easy to rush to judgement, despair or fear and think that it will always be, but there are important lessons for me and indeed for the whole coalition. This moment that we're in right now presents a new opportunity, and we must seize it. The great Sir Robert Menzies once reminded us that 'the greatest enemy to present joy and high hopes is the cultivation of retrospective bitterness'. Drawing on past grievances won't help us rebuild, but honest reflection, clarity of purpose and renewed commitment to our longstanding beliefs will.
  • Like it or not, voters always get it right. You may not like the decision, but in a democracy they are the better judge. It's clear Australians did not think that the coalition was ready to govern. With the benefit of hindsight, I suspect they were right. In my view, we failed to express some of our most important beliefs, the very same beliefs for which we've seen the coalition elected many times before. How can we be the party of lower taxes and sound economic management if we oppose tax cuts and fail to deliver and outline a clear vision for tax reform? With bracket creep coming into sharper focus, we cannot afford to sit on the sidelines and allow it to happen. Put simply, it's robbing hardworking Australians of money that should be in their back pockets and not in the Treasury.
  • Speaking of robbery, this is what the current Treasurer is doing with the proposed tax on superannuation for those with a balance of $3 million or more. You know it's a bad idea when the father of superannuation, former prime minister Paul Keating, is saying that this is unconscionable. He knows, like everyone else, that it needs to be indexed; otherwise, the very workers that he sought to protect by creating this superannuation guarantee will be the ones most affected by Treasurer Chalmers's foolish ideas.
  • With millions of Australians paying billions in tax each year, the electorate is crying out for taxation reform. With productivity continuing to decline, reforming the tax system is one pathway to restoring it. We face a very simple choice: should governments find more ways to tax Australians, or should we collectively work together to get Australia's budget back into a sustainable position? As Liberals, it should definitely be the latter. It is in our DNA. But we need to find the collective will and courage to fight for this. I firmly believe that, if we contest the next election with a vision of economic strength and a plan for tax reform, Australians will see the coalition as the alternative government that they've been looking for. We must cast a vision for Australia, something more than just good policy.
  • Under the leadership of the Hon. Sussan Ley, I've been privileged to serve in her shadow ministry as the shadow minister for infrastructure, fisheries and forestry. These sectors are critical to the Australian economy. Infrastructure impacts Australians every day. Through efficient and safe infrastructure, we enable businesses to boost productivity and transport goods. We enable people to get to work safely, parents to do the school run, public transport to operate and so on. In this portfolio, I'll be primarily investigating the need to improve road safety. Last year, 1,300 lives were lost on our roads, the highest in a decade. That is one less person at family dinners or at Christmas gatherings. We must ensure that funds are allocated correctly to make our roads safer, and I'd add to that we must ensure that projects are delivered on time and on budget for that to occur.
  • I'll also champion the infrastructure needs of my home state, Western Australia. Infrastructure fuels economic growth, yet WA seems to be missing out, despite being the engine room of this country, as I'm sure you'd agree, Acting Deputy President Cox. A 2019 Australian infrastructure audit estimated that congestion in Perth would cost $3.1 billion annually by 2031. Winding roads and freeways are sensible, but often we react to congestion rather than proactively plan and build before it becomes an issue. We also need to rethink commuting options. Perth has one of the lowest rates of walking and cycling trips nationwide. According to Infrastructure Australia, there are 4.2 million private car trips daily, with 2.8 million under five kilometres.
  • The other major element of my portfolio is fisheries and forestry, two industries under constant attack by the Australian Labor Party and the Greens. Along with Senator Cadell, I work constructively to ensure government policies support these industries and enable sustainable operation for future generations. Bizarrely, the Left seems hell-bent on squeezing these industries until they collapse. In WA, the Cook Labor government has banned native logging, with little regard for the regional towns that relied on it and offering limited alternative economic opportunities. Let me be clear: while the coalition agrees that these industries must operate sustainably, we also believe in the people and the towns that rely on them and the vibrant economy that they contribute to. My family hails from Manjimup, a beautiful part of the world. I love native forests, but everything must be balanced, and a total ban is not the answer.
  • As many of you know, I also love the great outdoors. During recent school holidays, only a few weeks ago, my family and I drove the Great Central Road to the Red Centre. This is the road that cuts straight through from Laverton all the way to Uluru. It's Australia's longest road route and it's an incredible shortcut. In fact, it's known as the great shortcut. It saves you about 1,200 kilometres if you take that direct route rather than going through Port Augusta and across the Nullarbor. The journey along the Great Central Road is an epic odyssey. There remains a 736-kilometre unsealed section on the Western Australian side. Having experienced it firsthand, I will advocate for this part to be fully sealed. I want to give a special shout-out to the Mayor of Laverton, Patrick Hill. He has led this cause for over 25 years. He is someone who deserves great recognition.
  • A heads-up to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee budget estimates process: I will be coming to that committee with many questions on why this road has not been sealed already. The funding is there. My initial investigations suggest that the delays are linked to native title issues. The Morrison government allocated $400 million to this project. The money's sitting there. But the state Labor government has sat on it for over three years. My understanding is that the conflicted areas cover only a small part of the route, so why is the Albanese government allowing it to stall?
  • This is a vital infrastructure project for Western Australia and, indeed, the nation. A third transport link into WA is critical. Two years ago, there was a fire down on the Nullarbor and a flood up in the Kimberley. The flood destroyed the Fitzroy Crossing bridge, and, of course, the transcontinental railway and the Eyre Highway were blocked by the fire. Freight had to be shipped from either Melbourne or Adelaide to get across to Perth. That included groceries. The case for sealing this route is clear, and the inaction shows that WA is being taken for granted. I'll have more to say about this in coming months.
  • In closing, much work remains for my party to return to government. It's obvious the Australian people didn't think that we were ready to govern on 3 May. The Liberal Party has a lot of rebuilding to do. But, when faced with adversity, we should meet those challenges head-on. Restoring trust with the electorate, delivering policies that bring meaningful change and building a stronger Australia for families should be our guiding goal. Building a stronger Australia starts with stronger families. Policies like income splitting for families with young children are more than good ideas -- and a special shout-out to you, Senator Collins, for your great first speech last night and for raising this important topic. They recognise that the great sacrifices of stay-at-home parents are important. These mothers and fathers do vital work raising the next generation and deserve a fair tax system that honours their choices rather than punishing them.
  • The climate paradox : why we need to reset action on climate change On education, we need to get back to basics. Every Australian child deserves a solid foundation in literacy and numeracy within a calm and orderly classroom. This involves backing evidence based teaching methods and raising standards, not lowering them. On energy and climate, Tony Blair, in his foreword to the paper , makes it clear: we cannot meet our climate goals with ideological divides that continue to hold us back. Australia needs realism and support for technologies that can deliver clean, reliable, affordable power. Nuclear energy should be on the table, not as a last resort but as part of our energy mix. I want to be part of a process that makes these changes happen, not one that stalls progress -- a process that seeks to improve rather than stifle good ideas.
  • There are many challenges facing us as a nation. One of them, of course, will be the advancement of artificial intelligence. We're less than 18 months away from having artificial general intelligence. That is going to profoundly change the way we go about life. It will happen within this term of parliament. Within this term of parliament, we will see dramatic changes in the way that our lives are impacted. In fact, it's going to impact upon government, and it's going to impact upon revenue. There are many challenges that we are going to have to face in this parliament.
  • In the Liberal Party, we've faced lows before. We're at an all-time low right now, but we can deal with it. We've been written off before. We've been written off as out of touch before. We've been written off, but we will rise again. As the 40th president of the United States, who endured a period in the political wilderness himself, once said:
  • From times of hardship, we've always emerged with a renewed sense of confidence and a determination to meet and to conquer whatever challenges lie ahead.
• Ellie Whiteaker, Western Australia, ALP, 12:30 15 min [16]
  • Western Australia 12:30 () (): I'm delighted to speak to this address-in-reply today. I want to thank the Governor-General for her generosity to us in recent weeks -- in particular, to us new parliamentarians. Her Excellency welcomed new senators and members to Government House while we were at school earlier this month and then opened Government House to our families ahead of the first sitting last week. I also thank her for her address to senators and members in this place, setting out the government's agenda for the term.
  • On 3 May, the Australian people made their voices heard. Australians re-elected the Albanese Labor government for a second term with an increased majority -- and an historic majority at that. It's a very clear endorsement of the work that the Prime Minister and the Labor government did in the first term and of the plan we presented to build a better future for our country -- a plan to deliver cost-of-living relief, to strengthen Medicare, to get more people into their first home, to create a more accessible universal early childhood education and care system and to build a future made in Australia. It's a clear mandate to deliver on that plan. In my home state of Western Australia, it's a mandate to continue to keep WA's economy strong, to make more things in WA and to keep helping Western Australian families. That is exactly what we will do. Western Australians know that it is only under a Labor government that they will see action on the things that matter most to them.
  • This government has been really clear. Tackling the cost of living is our No. 1 priority. We want Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn, and we've made good progress. The Albanese government has got wages up and brought inflation down, but we know that cost-of-living challenges are still being felt by many Australians. That's why we will do more. Following the recent federal budget, the government legislated tax cuts that took effect on the first of this month. These changes will deliver real tax relief to every Australian taxpayer, helping ease cost-of-living pressures and tackling bracket creep head-on. It's a meaningful step to put more money back into the pockets of Australians.
  • We're not stopping there. Further rounds of tax cuts will be locked in for 2026 and 2027 -- fair and simple relief for low- and middle-income earners. On 1 July this year, award and minimum wage workers, including those in hospitality, retail and community services, received a 3.5 per cent pay rise -- a real pay rise, above inflation. It's something Labor fought for. Just this week, we've been legislating to cut HECS debt, to make medicines cheaper and to protect penalty rates. We're also delivering more support for parents -- extending paid parental leave to six months so that families can spend more time together at home in those early months when they most need to be with their new babies. And for the first time, superannuation will be included on government paid parental leave, a crucial step in ensuring women are better off in their retirement and in closing the gap that so often emerges over the course of many women's lives when they take time off to have a family.
  • We are also delivering another round of power bill credits -- another $150 credit for every household -- to help bring down household costs. Treasury estimates that this will directly reduce headline inflation by around half a percentage point in 2025 and reduce household bills by 712 per cent, on average, compared to bills without the extension. In WA, along with the power bill credits delivered by the Cook Labor government in recent years, these credits have meant Western Australians have received significant bill relief at the time they needed it most.
  • Australians are proud of our world-class healthcare system, and Labor is proud to have created it. Medicare was established by the Hawke government over 50 years ago, and the Albanese Labor government will honour that legacy by making the single largest investment in Medicare ever. In the last term, the government opened 87 Medicare urgent care clinics right across the country, with plans to establish a further 50 this term. This will mean that four in five Australians will live within a 20-minute drive of a Medicare urgent care clinic, within a 20-minute drive of free walk-in care. The government will establish 1800MEDICARE, a 24-hour free health advice service that will help save Australians from unnecessary trips to the emergency department. And we will roll out our plan to make more GP visits free, because we know you shouldn't need your credit card to get the health care you need. Only Labor can be trusted to strengthen Medicare, because we created it and we will always protect it.
  • We know that many Australians are working hard, doing all the right things, but are still struggling to buy a home or afford -- or even find -- a rental, and that's why housing is a key priority for this government. We are making it easier for first home buyers to buy a home, with a plan to support five per cent deposits, in every town, every city and every region across our country. And we'll build 100,000 new homes to be set aside specifically for first home buyers so that they're not competing with investors just to get a foot in the door. These measures will shave years off the time it takes to save for a deposit and will open the door to a new generation of homeownership. We're also making renting fairer, having already worked with a number of states around the country to ban no-grounds evictions, cap rent increases and set minimum rental standards. We've increased rental assistance by 45 per cent, helping more than a million households keep a roof over their heads.
  • Ultimately, though, we know the best way to make housing more affordable is to simply build more of them. That's why this government will deliver the biggest housing construction program in our nation's history -- 1.2 million new homes, including 55,000 social and affordable homes, through the Housing Australia Future Fund and other initiatives. We're investing in the infrastructure to support that growth, cutting red tape and backing the tradies who'll build them, because housing should be within reach, whether you're looking to buy, renting or just looking for a safe roof over your head.
  • The Albanese government knows that early learning sets the foundation for everything that follows. It helps kids start school ready to learn and it helps parents get back to or stay in work. That's why we will guarantee three days a week of subsidised early learning education for children who need it, beginning on 1 January next year. This will make a real difference for more than 100,000 working families. Those earning between $50,000 and $100,000 will save, on average, $1,460 per year. That's real cost-of-living relief.
  • Making early education and care the best it can be, the best possible quality, is a key priority for our government. That's why we are also supporting new and expanded centres where they're needed most with our Building Early Education Fund. It's a billion dollars to make sure all families, no matter where they live, can access quality education and care centres for their children. It will support early education and care in our outer suburbs, in regional towns and in our fastest-growing communities -- the areas most in need of more funding. It will help not-for-profit providers grow, will support co-located services on school grounds and will look at ways we can directly invest in centres. All of this is part of the government's plan to make early education and care more affordable, more available and more universal, ensuring every child, no matter where they live or what their background is, can thrive from their earliest years. The Prime Minister has been clear. He wants to build a universal education and care system where every child can access high-quality early education that is simple, affordable and accessible, and that is what we are doing.
  • We are also building a future made in Australia in our cities, our regions and our communities that power our economy. The government will continue to drive that investment in local manufacturing, because our ambition doesn't end at digging things out of the ground. We want to process, manufacture and value-add right here at home. We are backing industry that will convert these minerals, many of which are in my home state of Western Australia, into solar panels and batteries -- the very technologies that will power the next century of Australian homes and businesses.
  • And we're helping Australian households be a part of that clean energy future too. We will subsidise the cost of home batteries for Australian households, reducing their power bills for life. Our $2.3 billion Cheaper Home Batteries Program will help more than a million households install home batteries by 2030. It will reduce the cost of a typical battery by around 30 per cent. Families with rooftop solar will be able to store their own power and use it when they need it. It will cut power bills by up to $1,100 per year. The program builds on that same trusted scheme that helped millions of households install solar, and we're extending that success to batteries. We are also supporting small businesses and communities to install batteries, helping more Australians reduce their reliance on the grid and pushing down power prices for everyone. This is a smart energy policy and it is real cost-of-living relief.
  • We are lowering bills, cutting emissions and keeping investment flowing into Australian manufacturing. The Albanese government is committed to making more things here in Australia and more things in Western Australia. Whether it's batteries or ferries to expand WA's public transport network, we're creating good, local jobs. We're also investing in transport infrastructure to support Perth's growing suburbs, including in my own neck of the woods, with works to widen the Kwinana Freeway to reduce traffic congestion and enhance freight efficiency.
  • The Albanese government is delivering on its promises for working people. We're training the next generation of tradies, with nearly 600,000 free TAFE places already delivered. Apprentices in construction and clean energy are now eligible for a $10,000 support payment to help them stay on course and finish their training. Today, the Senate passed our bill to cut student debt by 20 per cent, just like Labor promised. We know this is a game changer for Australians just starting their careers, saving for their first home, juggling a mortgage or raising young kids. Every little bit helps. And we're going even further, raising the repayment threshold so people aren't forced to start paying debt when they can least afford it.
  • For our kids in school, we're getting every school in every state on a path to full funding. As part of our agreement with the states, we're lifting the Commonwealth contribution from 20 per cent to 25 per cent of the school resourcing standard. The funding is tied to the reforms needed to lift education standards right across the country. It means more help for students and more help for teachers.
  • This is all about fairness. It's about giving Australians a better start and delivering on the commitments we made, because that's what good government looks like. Labor's vision is clear. We are backing working people. We're backing families. This government is committed to building Australia's future.
• Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP, 12:45 16 min [26]
  • South Australia Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate 12:45 ( -- ) (): I too today rise to speak on the Governor-General's address to this place on the opening of the 48th Parliament. Can I firstly express my absolute appreciation and gratitude to the people of South Australia for the privilege once again of serving them in this place and being sworn into the 48th Parliament. I can absolutely commit to the people of South Australia that I will continue, first and foremost, to fight hardest for their interests, as I have done in my previous 12 years -- nearly 13 years -- here, because in this place our first duty is always to represent the state that elected us to be here.
  • Right now, there couldn't be an issue that is more important to prosecute in this place on behalf of the people of South Australia than the absolutely devastating algal bloom that is occurring in the Gulf of St Vincent. We've known now for probably seven or eight months that this algal bloom is threatening marine life and the economic lives of those people that rely on the gulf for their livelihoods, whether that be the communities, the fishers, the tourism operators or the other businesses that are in those communities. This algal bloom has threatened them over the last six months. It continues to threaten them, and they remain in a state of incredible uncertainty because we don't actually know what our governments -- both the state government and the federal government -- are intending to do in order to support those communities and, most particularly, to understand what needs to be done to get rid of this algal bloom and ensure it doesn't happen again and then, of course, once the algal bloom has been dealt with in whatever way is appropriate, manage the cleanup that follows and support those communities as they get back on their feet.
  • I say that because, as I said, we've known about the algal bloom since December last year. There's been concern expressed, and yet very little was done. Very little has been done by the state government and the federal government. We now find ourselves in a situation where the algal bloom is quite catastrophic, and everybody is wondering what they are going to do to deal with this problem. We know that it is impacted by warmer weather. As we are now slowly creeping our way out of winter into spring, we know that the threat the algal bloom currently presents is only going to heighten.
  • So it's too little too late, but we now need to make sure that we are acting with absolute urgency to deal with this. We can't have a situation where our governments don't care about it when we see an impact on the beaches of Edithburgh and Stansbury. But I'm telling you that this will now hit the beaches of Brighton and Glenelg, and maybe then, as it hits our metropolitan beaches, we will see the government take this more seriously. Unfortunately the track records of this government and the one in South Australia have shown it only matters if it occurs in our cities.
  • One of the biggest issues that we saw during the last term and we saw during the election campaign -- and Her Excellency the Governor-General raised it in her address to this parliament on behalf of the government that leads the 48th Parliament -- was Medicare. I want to reflect on a matter of serious consequence to the Australian public, and that is the Albanese government's preparedness to continue to repeatedly mislead the Australian public about Medicare, particularly about whether you need your credit card or whether you are going to have out-of-pocket costs when you go to see your GP. During the campaign, the Prime Minister confidently declared on a number of occasions:
  • One card covers it all.
  • Not your credit card -- your Medicare card.
  • He reiterated this promise in excess of 71 times during the campaign, promising all Australians would need is their Medicare card to see a GP for free.
  • The election goes by. Australians are continuously misled about the out-of-pocket costs that they are going to be paying. Australians also know right now they have never paid more out of their pockets when they go to see a GP. The Prime Minister, I think, knew what he was telling Australians wasn't true, but the sad fact is that now, following the election, we find out that the Prime Minister's own Department of Health and Aged Care, under FOI and the incoming government brief, confirms that the government's modelling showed that 25 per cent of GP clinics will not bulk-bill under the government's own policy framework. That statistic completely and utterly shatters the Prime Minister's promise to Australians that they would not require anything more than their Medicare card when they visited a GP.
  • We also see other independent and reliable sources like the RACGP, AMA, Cleanbill and the like, underpinning the report from the Department of Health and Aged Care in relation to the very unlikely chance of the quotes of the Prime Minister ever coming true, with reports from all of these organisations saying that GPs will not be in a position to be able to fully bulk-bill Australians, which is the promise the Prime Minister continuously made -- in fact, it was made 71 times. And we also saw this week the Minister for Health and Ageing belled the cat in his recent comments to morning television, when he said:
  • We never said there'd be a hundred per cent bulk billing.
  • Well, I'd like to understand the difference between 100 per cent bulk-billing that the minister says they never promised and the Prime Minister promising Australians that all you would need is your Medicare card. I would really like to understand how the Prime Minister and the health minister can conceive they are saying the same thing. But the Prime Minister has been absolutely unequivocal in his promise to Australians.
  • Let me be clear, the coalition wants Australians to be able to get timely access to affordable healthcare. We hope the Prime Minister actually hasn't lied to Australians. Unfortunately, we fear that he has. And the worst part of it is that not only are Australians having to put their hand in their pocket every time they see their GP but the amount of money they have to pull out of their pocket has never been higher. Right now, out of pocket costs to see your GP are the highest they have ever been. They increased 45 per cent in the three years of the first term of the Albanese Labor government.
  • We've also seen bulk-billing rates falling from over 88 per cent when we left government to 77 per cent now. That is an 11 per cent drop in bulk-billing rates over the three years of the Albanese government, and yet many opposite still come in here and actually mislead this place by suggesting, for some reason, that bulk-billing rates have gone up under Labor. The facts, the statistics, the national accounts and your very own department's figures all show bulk-billing rates have plummeted by 11 per cent. As a result of that, last year alone there were 40 million fewer bulk-billed visits to our GPs in Australia. That's 40 million more visits to the GP where people have actually had to pay out-of-pocket costs, and they have risen on average to $48 per consultation.
  • As a result of this, people are not going to see the doctor, because, they say, they can't afford to do so. Last year, 1.5 million Australians said that they didn't visit their doctor because they couldn't afford to. That's 1.5 million Australians who were forced into making a decision between going to the doctor and putting food on the table, meeting their mortgage repayments and paying for their groceries, their electricity and their insurance. These are the decisions that are being forced upon Australians, and they are not decisions that Australians should ever be making. But the reality is that, when people avoid seeing the doctor and avoid getting primary care, they inevitably become sicker. Inevitably, when they become sicker, the place they end up in is our emergency departments or ramped in ambulances outside of our hospitals. Not only is that really bad for the person who's impacted; it also means there is additional pressure on our hospital systems. We know that, once you get sicker, the cost of that care is so much higher.
  • What we've seen is a government that has run around telling stories to Australians to try and hide from the fact that, by every metric in the healthcare system, it has failed Australians in the last three years. It is a national failure of this government. The Labor government came to power promising to strengthen Medicare, and, in reality, all this Labor government has done is weaken it. But, most distressingly, we have a Prime Minister who is prepared to lie to Australians about something as important as their access to health care. The reality is that Australians know that it's never been harder or more expensive to see a doctor.
  • ( Senator Marielle Smith ): Senator Ruston, I ask you to withdraw your comment a few moments back, which I think you're aware of. Can you please withdraw?
  • I will withdraw. The fact is that these promises have been made to Australians, and I can assure the people of South Australia that, as your representative in this place, I will be holding the government to account to make sure that it delivers on the promises that it has made to you. If it does not deliver on those promises, I will make sure that you are well aware of the fact that you were misled in the lead-up to this election, because you deserve, as every other Australian deserves, easy and quick access to affordable health care in Australia. It is a fundamental right of all Australians.
  • But this is not the only promise that was broken. In the 2022 election, the then opposition, as it sought to become the government, made a number of promises to the Australian public. During the previous term of this parliament, it failed to deliver most of them. The reality is that the challenges that we were facing in the last term haven't gone away. Australians are still struggling with the cost of living. It doesn't matter how many times the government tell everybody how fabulously they're doing and about all the wonderful things they're doing, Australians know because they can feel it in their hip pocket. They can feel it in their family budgets. They feel it every time they go to the supermarket or go to pay their mortgage.
  • There's another promise that this government made that it's failed to keep. We know that we're in the midst of a housing crisis in this country. The Housing Australia Future Fund promised so much to Australians, yet in this place we have failed to get the government to even tell us how many houses have been built by this Housing Australia Future Fund. I fear that it's probably a very low number. My understanding is that it's probably only 17. Half a billion dollars in the last 12 months was allocated from the Housing Australia Future Fund to build houses for Australians, yet we understand that probably fewer than 20 have been constructed already.
  • When it comes to aged care, in 2022, this government came in on a platform of saying it was going to put the 'care' back into aged care. I cannot possibly see how denying 87,000 Australians, as we stand here today, the care that they have been assessed as needing achieves that when this government refuses to release the home-care packages that are needed to get rid of the waitlist that has absolutely blown out under this government. That is a waitlist that's more than doubled in the last three years, and the wait is three times longer than it was three years ago. How on earth can this government think that is putting the 'care' back in to aged care?
  • The government went to the election promising 83,000 new home-care packages to try and deal with the waitlist that has blown out under its time in government, and what do we see? The government's first action following the election was the withdrawal of those 83,000 packages for the Australians who are currently waiting on the priority waiting list. They've withdrawn them, so these people are once again left without the care that they have been professionally assessed as needing.
  • The other thing the government needs to come to terms with is the fact it cannot review its way through this next term of government. The last term of government was absolutely littered with review after review after review. The time for review is over. It is time for action. We need to actually do some of the things that Australians were promised in 2022. Most of the promises that were made in 2022 that were not able to be kept have been re-promised in 2025. I say to the government: if you are serious about delivering the agenda that the Governor-General set out and laid out in her speech to this place, then you need to stop reviewing and you need to start doing.
  • I hope the government deliver in this next term of government, because the Australian public deserve nothing less from their government. I fear that they won't, but all of us on the coalition side, for the sake of Australians, hope they actually do something this time.
  • Interjection / Marielle Smith (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), South Australia, ALP
  • Continue / Anne Ruston, South Australia, LP
• Richard Dowling, Tasmania, ALP, 13:01 8 min [18]
  • Tasmania 13:01 () (): Again, I note this is not my first speech. It is a great honour to rise today in reply to the Her Excellency the Governor-General's speech marking the opening of the 48th Parliament. I thank Her Excellency for the generosity and clarity with which she spoke of the government's legislative agenda. Her speech struck a tone that was both optimistic and clear-eyed, one that acknowledged our strengths as a nation and our responsibilities as a parliament. The values she invoked -- kindness, courage, humility and service -- are values that I believe in and, I'd hope, this whole chamber believes in. They are values that I know are lived every day by the people I represent, from Hobart's eastern shore to the Huon Valley, from Devonport to the West Coast, and every community in between.
  • Australians returned the Albanese government with a strengthened mandate because we've delivered and because we've listened. We've brought fairness and stability back into economic management, with tax cuts for every Australian, not just the top end of town. We've invested in the fundamentals that support our prosperity for future generations: Medicare, schools, housing, clean energy and secure jobs. We as a Labor Party and as a government know the work is not finished and that we must do more. And we want to do more. The Australian people expect us to do more, and they trust us to do more.
  • The 48th Parliament has opened with a clear and urgent focus: cutting student debt by 20 per cent. In my home state of Tasmania, last year the average outstanding student debt was almost $23,000. A 20 per cent reduction in that debt is worth more than $412 thousand to each of the over 50,000 Tasmanians who will benefit. We're also raising the repayment thresholds and moving to a fairer marginal repayment system.
  • Other focus areas include making child care safer, more affordable and more accessible to more families; strengthening Medicare -- the roll-out of 87 Medicare urgent care clinics across Australia, with 50 more to be built over the next three years, and the establishment of 1800MEDICARE; a $10 billion investment to build 100,000 new homes just for first home buyers; tackling cost-of-living pressures with practical, targeted support; making education more affordable and more accessible for all Australians, with fee-free TAFE right across the country and, as mentioned, cutting 20 per cent of all student loan debts; supporting older Australians through aged-care and pension reform; advancing the National Reconstruction Fund to drive local manufacturing; strengthening our defence capability and deepening our regional engagement; continuing the transition to clean energy with confidence and ambition; and boosting our nation's productivity, growing our economy and making sure everyone stands to benefit -- whatever they do and wherever they live.
  • Labor's agenda has been embraced by millions of Australians on a scale that few predicted at the start of the election. You'd think such a result would give pause for thought from the other side. Indeed, just last week, we heard from the other side that the election result was 'humiliating' and warranted time for reflection -- reflection, we are told, that will result in them being 'more constructive'. Yet, in the next breath, we heard nothing but derision about some of the very policies those millions of Australians clearly voted for across every state and territory.
  • There is no alternative from the other side. They have lost touch with Australian needs, wants and expectations. Australians need action on the cost of living, whether that be through energy bill relief, reducing student debt, cheaper medicines, access to free TAFE, or affordable childcare. Australians want to know that they and their families will get a fair go, that the economy they work in will reward effort, that they'll be able to buy their own home, that their children will be safe at childcare and that their elderly parents will be looked after with dignity in their final years.
  • Australians expect action on climate change. That is why we've announced a $2 billion expansion of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. Contrast this with the other side, who, in the first week of parliament, were already arguing with themselves about net zero targets.
  • The government's priorities must be delivered in every region, and that includes my region -- my home state of Tasmania. For young Tasmanians, particularly first-in-family university students from rural areas, the wiping of indexation and reduction of HECS debt can be the difference between staying in the state or leaving Tasmania altogether. HECS debt relief will make a huge difference for approximately 52,000 Tasmanians. It's not only cost-of-living relief; it's an investment in people who have made an investment in themselves and in improving their future.
  • On childcare safety: in Tasmania's smaller communities, where services are often stretched and staff are in short supply, ensuring that national standards on childcare safety are enforced and properly resourced will matter deeply to working families. When it comes to affordable housing, there are too many Tasmanians unable to buy their own home who are waiting too long for social housing or who have to continually move around because they're renting. Just yesterday, my office had a call from an elderly woman concerned about what was going to happen to her after her landlord sells the home she's been renting for years. The government's build-to-rent scheme will give greater security to tenants, with five-year leases. Homeownership is a way for people to genuinely own a stake in the economy and a way to help support intergenerational equity. For this we need to build more homes and unlock more land supply.
  • On the cost-of-living issue: from petrol prices in Queenstown to the cost of groceries in Sorell, Tasmanians feel the pinch of distance and distribution. That's why targeted relief like energy bill rebates and rent support must reflect regional realities.
  • Turning to clean energy: Tasmania's leadership in hydro, wind and emerging green hydrogen means we're well placed to play a central role in Australia's clean energy transition. But we need national coordination and long-term investment certainty to maximise that role.
  • On the topic of aged care: in towns across Tasmania, aged care isn't an abstract policy; it's deeply personal and community based. Reform must lift standards, improve workforce conditions and respect rural providers.
  • Like many in this chamber, I've come to this place with a belief that politics should be about practical progress and that governments should be a force for good. From Rosny College to this red chamber, I've seen how public policy shapes lives and how it must evolve to meet new challenges.
  • One area that I hope to contribute to is improving the nation's productivity. Only through productivity improvements can we achieve higher living standards for the next generation. It won't be an easy task, but it's one we should confront with optimism and confidence.
  • Whether on economic development, education or the energy transition, I'm here to contribute constructively and to ensure that Tasmanian voices are not only heard but central to national decision-making. The Governor-General said:
  • ... democracy is always a work in progress -- one that thrives when ideas and propositions are subject to robust, but respectful, interrogation.
  • She's right. That means disagreeing well, listening, acting in good faith and delivering results that improve lives -- not just for the loudest or the most powerful, but for every Australian.
  • This 48th Parliament opens at a time of global uncertainty but also of national opportunity. Let us use this opportunity well. Let's live up to the faith Australians have placed in us. Let's govern with the values Her Excellency reminded us of -- humility, strength and service -- for Tasmania, for the nation and for future generations.
• Dave Sharma, New South Wales, LP, 13:09 16 min [18]
  • New South Wales 13:09 () (): Australia faces immense challenges. We live in a dangerous and more unstable world, our geographic isolation no longer affords us the protection that it once did, and the liberal international trading system which has done so much to underpin Australian prosperity is under threat. Our Defence Force is underfunded and underequipped, and our economy, once the envy of the world, is stagnating.
  • Australia is a great and prosperous nation, but this is not the result of dumb luck or mere chance. It's something that we have built collectively, through active choices and decisions taken over decades. Our economic success has been built by hard work, by liberal economic policies, by a thriving private sector, by competition and dynamism, by a willingness to embrace new technologies and new methods of working, and by ensuring that effort, enterprise and risk taking are rewarded, not punished. Unless and until such time as we rediscover those principles, unless and until such time as we get our economy out of its rut and get it moving again, our other national challenges will only grow more profound. We will not be able to modernise and enlarge our defence forces, as we so desperately need to do. We will not be able to modernise or upgrade our infrastructure. We will not be able to continue to fund generous social services and health care. We will not be able to care for communities in need, be they the elderly or those with a disability. Turning a blind eye to the profound economic challenges we face, or pretending -- as this government has done over the past three years -- that we have no agency or ability to address them, is national negligence of the highest order.
  • In her address, the Governor-General noted the government's newly found interest in productivity and in a more resilient and diversified economy. It's refreshing to hear this Labor government finally acknowledge the scale of economic challenges facing our nation. At least the era of denial seems to be over. If the Labor government are genuine about seeking to address these challenges, then they will find a constructive partner in the Liberal Party. I'm very grateful to have been appointed as the shadow assistant minister for competition, charities and Treasury by the Leader of the Opposition, and I look forward to working with my colleagues across this parliament to scrutinise, hold to account and support, where warranted, this government's economic policy.
  • But let's be honest about our challenges. Under this Labor government, we've got lower living standards, we've got higher debt, we've got higher taxes, we've got stagnant productivity, and we've got anaemic business investment. The government now say their ambition for rising wages, growth and productivity requires a unified national effort. Well, this damascene conversion is welcome, but Australians are right to ask: where has this ambition been for the past three years? We've seen GDP per capita -- the best measure of family, household and individual prosperity -- in sustained decline under this government. It's likely that GDP per capita will not recover to 2022 levels until 2030. That is a lost decade. We've had productivity stagnant since Labor came to office. It currently sits at 2016 levels.
  • We've had this government take $144 billion in new spending decisions since coming to office and, in addition, spend much of the windfall from high commodity prices. In the last budget, we saw government spending growing at six per cent, four times faster than the rate at which the economy is growing. That is unsustainable. And it's reflected in the jobs figures. Four in five jobs created in the past two years have been in the non-market sector, propelled by government spending. This is the only part of the economy that is actually growing, the non-market sector.
  • Business investment is close to the debts last seen in the middle of the 1990s recession, over three decades ago. The OECD estimates that Australia has a 30 per cent shortfall in investment relative to economic output, making us the third worst-placed country in the OECD on this metric. Our energy costs are now some of the highest in the developed world when they were once amongst the lowest and formed a key plank of our competitive advantage. Energy is an input into every facet of economic activity, and high energy costs effectively act as a tax on production. This deterioration in competitive advantage is a direct result of the flawed energy transition being pursued by this Labor government.
  • I now want to turn to productivity, which is the topic of many speeches at present and the focus of the government's upcoming economic reform summit in August. As the Productivity Commission has rightly identified, productivity growth has accounted for 80 per cent of national income growth over the past 80 years. That means that productivity is the basis of higher living standards. It underpins economic growth. It's why this generation of Australians is materially better off, with more opportunities and better health than previous generations of Australians. The only way that today's parents can expect their children to have a better standard of life and more opportunity is if we get productivity moving again.
  • As Ken Henry noted in his recent Press Club address, unless Labor's anaemic productivity is rebooted, this government will need to raise taxes by as much as five per cent of GDP. That is the pathway we are heading down: a low-productivity, high-cost, high-tax, high-spend economy. Ken Henry further noted that the average Australian today is cumulatively half a million dollars worse off because of the failure to match our productivity performance in the last two decades of the 2000s to that of the 1980s and 1990s. But it's important to understand that our productivity performance is not uniform. In the market sector -- the private sector, largely -- productivity has increased by 35 per cent since 2000. But, in the non-market sector -- the sector which is overwhelmingly government owned, operated or funded -- productivity has grown by just two per cent in that period. So that's an increase of 35 per cent in the market sector since 2000 and an increase of two per cent in the non-market sector since 2000. Remember, four out of five jobs created in the past two years have been in the non-market sector.
  • It is this growth in government spending which is driving the creation of non-market sector jobs, crowding out the private sector and hurting our overall national productivity. But, even in the market sector, productivity performance has been patchy. In construction, for instance, which is worth highlighting, labour productivity has gone backwards in past decades. In the past two decades, for instance, labour productivity in dwelling construction has fallen by 33 per cent in terms of the number of houses built. This means it takes more workers more time to build a house than it did two decades ago. We are getting worse at building homes. If you want to know why we have a housing affordability crisis, part of the explanation lies in this figure.
  • Let's not forget that one of the very first acts of this government when elected in 2022 was to abolish the sole industrial umpire in the sector, the Australian Building and Construction Commission, the ABCC. Since that time, the unchecked, militant, unlawful and intimidatory tactics of the CFMEU and other emboldened construction unions have added an estimated 30 per cent to construction costs in Australia over the last three years. That's a tax that we all pay. It's a tax that our state governments have to pay if they're undertaking major infrastructure projects, but it's also a tax we all pay if we're seeking to renovate our home or buy a new home.
  • One of the most troubling figures to emerge in recent days -- which, I think, spells out the economic malaise we're in -- is that, today, more than 50 per cent of Australians rely on government for their main income, whether it's through public sector wages, social security benefits or subsidies. This is because we have seen government spending surge, going from 24 per cent of GDP to 27 per cent of GDP in just a few years. That's a figure that was last seen in the early 1980s, and there is no end in sight. This is strangling the private sector and increasingly turning Australia into a mendicant society, one that depends on government spending for its livelihood.
  • This government has now announced an Economic Reform Roundtable to take place in the third week of August. This is a welcome recognition, at least, that the Australian economy is in poor health and that we have an urgent need to address its ailments. Hopefully, it means the era of denial is over. But this summit has to be more than a ritualistic or formulaic exercise. It must deliver outcomes.
  • But you cannot say that the initial signs are promising. We've had the Prime Minister and the Treasurer rule out industrial relations changes. We've had the Prime Minister and the Treasurer effectively rule out any ambitious tax reform. We've had government ministers talk about giving unions a right of veto over the deployment of productive technology in the workplace. We've got trade unions having been given four out of the 24 spots available at this Economic Reform Roundtable.
  • One of the demands from the ACTU and trade unions -- these are the people who will occupy almost 20 per cent of the seats at this roundtable -- is to abolish the Productivity Commission. That's right: abolish the professional, independent, expert body that advises the government on how to improve productivity. The union suggestion is that this body should be abolished as a way to somehow improve our productivity. Another of their demands is to give trade unions a veto over the deployment and use of artificial intelligence in the workplace. Their final demand is a shorter working week, not offset by productivity increases, by increased workplace flexibility or by the deployment of new technologies -- just a shorter working week.
  • It doesn't augur well, and it has echoes of the Jobs and Skills Summit in 2022, which was, as business frankly concedes now, a complete stitch-up. It was used as a vehicle by the government to pursue dramatic changes to our industrial relations system, which has taken us well back beyond the era of Paul Keating. It's basically destroyed the system of enterprise bargaining that he helped introduce, and it's destroyed the very notion that workers in an enterprise can negotiate with their employer and trade off flexibility or productivity for material wage gains or better working conditions.
  • I want to turn briefly to competition, because competition is an area that must be addressed by this roundtable. Australia is being held back in too many sectors by weak competition. A lack of competition in these sectors is hurting not only the workers in those sectors, who are not able to sell their labour more effectively to other bidders, but also consumers. We have welcomed the government's work through the competition taskforce, and we remain ready to support important competition reforms.
  • But what have we seen on the government's agenda? Well, one of their first acts last week in the parliament was to seek to enshrine penalty rates in law, remove flexibility and make it more difficult for workers to negotiate higher rates of base pay by offsetting penalty rates -- something that many workers have pursued over the years. We've also seen ministers talk about giving unions a veto over the deployment of artificial intelligence. And, again, the only area of tax reform the government seems to be pursuing is a novel, untested and, frankly, nightmarish tax on unrealised gains in super accounts, something that has never been done before in Australia, which will almost certainly act not only as a tax on those individuals who have self-managed super funds with balances above the amount but a tax on early-stage investment.
  • We will hold this government to account for its big talk on productivity and economic growth. Australia is a great and prosperous nation not by chance but by choice. Our economic success has been built on hard work, on economic liberalism and on reward for effort. But weak productivity, a lack of competition and anaemic growth are all major challenges for Australia, and we cannot afford to sit by or think we can regulate or tax our way to prosperity. If we want to remain a high-income, high-opportunity country, we need to get serious about economic reform. That means less red tape, more competition and greater innovation so that we can restore our economic strength and leave the country in better shape for our children.
• Marielle Smith, South Australia, ALP, 13:25 [9]
  • South Australia 13:25 () (): I also rise to make a contribution to this debate. But, before I do, I absolutely need to thank and acknowledge the good people of South Australia for returning me to serve another six-year term, alongside all my fellow South Australian senators who were also re-elected, and I acknowledge Senator Antic, in the chamber, as one of them. I know it is absolutely the privilege of all of our lives to serve in this place. There's a deep level of trust placed in us by the people of our state, the greatest state in Australia, to do our job here, and I really want to recognise that. Oh, sorry! Senator Blyth, as well, is one of our South Australian senators representing that great state. So thank you, South Australians, for that privilege that you have bestowed upon us.
  • Throughout the campaign, my greatest hope was that the election would return an Albanese Labor government so that we could continue all the work we started last term. But my second greatest hope during the election campaign was to find myself with a new local member of parliament. The newly elected member for Sturt, Ms Claire Clutterham MP, is the first Labor MP in 53 years to serve in that seat and the first woman ever to be the local representative in that role. The member for Sturt worked extraordinarily hard during that campaign. She will be a fantastic addition to the federal parliament. I know she will make a great contribution. I also acknowledge Mr James Stevens for his service over six years as the previous member for Sturt.
  • There were many volunteers from our movement who contributed to the history-making result in Sturt and I want to thank and acknowledge all of them, including my friend Jason Byrne, who made a remarkable contribution to that effort. But there were many, many people who did, and I acknowledge all of them, too.
  • I also want to thank the Australian Electoral Commission and acknowledge the role that they played in the 2025 election campaign. Our democracy is the envy of the world, and our Electoral Commission deserves so much credit for that. We are extremely lucky to live in a country where we can take for granted the fact that we will have fairly conducted election campaigns, free of corruption and interference, and the AEC are the custodians of that. The people who work for the AEC do extraordinary work, over very, very long hours and often in trying circumstances. I do want to acknowledge their work and their contribution in the conduct of our recent federal election.
  • We took many commitments to the Australian people this federal election, but I think it is fair to say that the most significant of those commitments we took was about our healthcare system -- the future of Medicare, and how we choose to invest in health care, how we choose to prioritise health care, and especially how we choose to invest in and prioritise women's health. I've been advocating for greater investment in women's health since the start of my parliamentary career, because you simply do not have to look very far to see the instances where women's voices have gone unheard, where women have felt silenced, and where women have not received the support and care they need when it comes to their health care. I am deeply proud of the position we took to this election campaign -- our investment of some $800 million in women's health, including new medicines on the PBS for the first time in decades; new contraceptive pills on the PBS for the first time in decades; new hormone replacement therapy on the PBS for the first time in decades. We're also making substantial investments in men's health, too, which I'll come to later in my speech.
  • But health care, I think, was the defining policy question in our election campaign and it will be the defining work of all of us as we continue our term. There are few things more important -- really, is there anything more important? -- to Australian families than their health and the health of the people they love. And we know that we need to improve primary care in this country. We need to improve and invest more in the Medicare system in this country.
  • We are the pride of the world when it comes to our healthcare system, but it was systematically undermined by the previous government's previous prime ministers -- I can't remember how many there were. We need to turn that around and make much greater investments in our healthcare system. Women's health is a significant part of that.
  • ( Senator Chandler ): Order! Senator Smith, you'll be in continuation when debate resumes on the address-in-reply. It being 1.30, it's time for two-minute statements.
  • Interjection / Claire Chandler (The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT), Tasmania, LP
• Single Subject Exchange
  • Analysis Fragment
  • Exchange Subject: Governor-General'S Speech / Address-In-Reply
  • Speaker Count: 6
  • Speakers: Matt O'Sullivan (LP); Ellie Whiteaker (ALP); Anne Ruston (LP); Richard Dowling (ALP); Dave Sharma (LP); Marielle Smith (ALP)
  • Rational Thought Positives: Matt O'Sullivan (LP): data with source signal: "Put simply, it's robbing hardworking Australians of money that should be in their back pockets and not in the Treasury. Speaking of robbery, this is what the current Treasurer is doing with the proposed tax on superannuation for those with a balance of $3 million or more."; Matt O'Sullivan (LP): data with source signal: "Infrastructure fuels economic growth, yet WA seems to be missing out, despite being the engine room of this country, as I'm sure you'd agree, Acting Deputy President Cox. A 2019 Australian infrastructure audit estimated that congestion in Perth would cost $3.1 billion annually by 2031."; Matt O'Sullivan (LP): data with source signal: "Perth has one of the lowest rates of walking and cycling trips nationwide. According to Infrastructure Australia, there are 4.2 million private car trips daily, with 2.8 million under five kilometres."; Ellie Whiteaker (ALP): data with source signal: "And for the first time, superannuation will be included on government paid parental leave, a crucial step in ensuring women are better off in their retirement and in closing the gap that so often emerges over the course of many women's lives when they take time off to have a family. We are also delivering another round of power bill credits -- another $150 credit for every household -- to help bring down household costs."; Ellie Whiteaker (ALP): data with source signal: "Treasury estimates that this will directly reduce headline inflation by around half a percentage point in 2025 and reduce household bills by 712 per cent, on average, compared to bills without the extension."; Anne Ruston (LP): quoted source material: "That statistic completely and utterly shatters the Prime Minister's promise to Australians that they would not require anything more than their Medicare card when they visited a GP. We also see other independent and reliable sources like the RACGP, AMA, Cleanbill and the like, underpinning the report from the Department of Health and Aged Care in relation to the very unlikely chance of the quotes of the Prime Minister ever coming true, with reports from all of these organisations saying that GPs will not be in a position to be able to fully bulk-bill Australians, which is the promise the Prime Minister continuously made -- in fact, it was made 71 times."; Anne Ruston (LP): data with source signal: "That is an 11 per cent drop in bulk-billing rates over the three years of the Albanese government, and yet many opposite still come in here and actually mislead this place by suggesting, for some reason, that bulk-billing rates have gone up under Labor. The facts, the statistics, the national accounts and your very own department's figures all show bulk-billing rates have plummeted by 11 per cent."; Anne Ruston (LP): source-backed reasoning: "They've withdrawn them, so these people are once again left without the care that they have been professionally assessed as needing. The other thing the government needs to come to terms with is the fact it cannot review its way through this next term of government."; Dave Sharma (LP): data with source signal: "Business investment is close to the debts last seen in the middle of the 1990s recession, over three decades ago. The OECD estimates that Australia has a 30 per cent shortfall in investment relative to economic output, making us the third worst-placed country in the OECD on this metric."; Dave Sharma (LP): data with source signal: "I now want to turn to productivity, which is the topic of many speeches at present and the focus of the government's upcoming economic reform summit in August. As the Productivity Commission has rightly identified, productivity growth has accounted for 80 per cent of national income growth over the past 80 years."; Dave Sharma (LP): data with source signal: "Let's not forget that one of the very first acts of this government when elected in 2022 was to abolish the sole industrial umpire in the sector, the Australian Building and Construction Commission, the ABCC. Since that time, the unchecked, militant, unlawful and intimidatory tactics of the CFMEU and other emboldened construction unions have added an estimated 30 per cent to construction costs in Australia over the last three years."
  • Mostly Empty Text: remaining material is mostly assertion, procedural wording, sympathy, slogans, or position-taking.