Steve Georganas's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
World Greek Language Day | Statements by Members | House debates
Today, 9 February, marks the recognition of World Greek Language Day by UNESCO. This recognition by UNESCO highlights the relationship between the Greek language and all other languages....
Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I rise to speak about this very important bill, a bill that will shape the future of how we learn, how we train and how we prepare our country for decades ahead. Of course, I'm talking about the...
I rise to speak about this very important bill, a bill that will shape the future of how we learn, how we train and how we prepare our country for decades ahead. Of course, I'm talking about the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025 and its companion, the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025 At their core, these bills are about creating a stronger, fairer and more coordinated tertiary education system for everyone. For years we've asked our universities and our TAFEs to do a huge amount of heavy lifting, and they've done a great job. They've served us well, but they've had to do it without a central body looking ahead. We need the central body looking ahead, planning across the whole system and making sure that Australia is ready for the challenges and the opportunities of the future. The truth is Australia's been missing parts of the bigger picture sometimes, and that's exactly what the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, or ATEC, is designed to fix. ATEC will act as the system's big-picture planner. It will guide how universities and vocational education work together, not just for the next year but for the next generation. That's so important, because it isn't something that we just dreamed up. The Australian Universities Accord Panel released its final report in 2024. This was the government's major review of the higher education sector, and it spelled out clearly that, without a dedicated and independent steward like ATEC, Australia can't properly prepare for our future skills needs or meet the expectations of students. The accord report made a powerful point: in the coming decades, around 80 per cent of all new jobs will require a TAFE or university qualification—80 per cent. That means more Australians will need to be able to access tertiary education and more pathways into study—whether it be through TAFE or through other higher educational options—and more support to actually complete the courses. So this bill is about getting ahead of that challenge of seeking the future, seeing what it'll be like and preparing ourselves for the future demands. Out of the 47 recommendations from the accord report, this government is implementing 31, and that includes some major improvements: doubling the number of university hubs across regional and suburban Australia, making it easier for people to study close to home—we know that, when you have options to study closer to home, it becomes a much easier task; expanding free university bridging courses, helping more Australians get the skills they need to begin a degree; and something students have been asking for for many, many years, and that is paid practical. For the first time, university students doing mandatory placements in areas like nursing, teaching and social work will finally receive some financial relief. We all know the pressures students are under. Many work part-time jobs. They're looking after family members and dealing with rising costs all while studying, so paid prac will be life-changing for so many students. We're also strengthening student advocacy. Under the new rules, at least 40 per cent of student services and amenity fees must go to student led organisations, making sure that students have a real voice on campus. And we're expanding Commonwealth Supported Places for First Nations students and introducing a national code to better respond to gender based violence in higher education, something that has been urgently needed. Let's not forget: we've already cut HECS debts by 20 per cent for current students and graduates, and that's real relief for so many Australian students. ATEC is the next great thing this government will implement. This new commission will have a clear mission guided by the new National Tertiary Education Objective. Basically, one shared vision for the whole tertiary system means universities and TAFEs will finally be working towards the same goals, not competing or operating in separate silos. ATEC will have three expert commissioners—a chief commissioner, a First Nations commissioner and another commissioner—with deep expertise. At least one must have strong VET knowledge, because vocational education is just as important as university education. These commissioners a appointed based on experience, not politics, and they'll make decisions based on evidence, research, fairness and what's best for Australian students, enforcing the commission's independence. One of ATEC's main jobs will be working with universities to create mission based compacts. These are agreements that spell out what each university actually stands for—their strengths, their goals and how they serve their community. And every university, of course, is different. Some lead in medical research, others in teaching, others in science and others in regional development or industry partnerships. These compacts will reflect that diversity while still lining up with national goals. We want to ensure that they're not rigid. They'll evolve as circumstances change, when different needs arise through different industries. If a university hits a bump in the road, where enrolments shift or there are economic changes or workforce shortages, ATEC won't punish them; it will work alongside them and to adjust the compact if needed to achieve their objectives and help them improve. It's about a partnership. It's not about punishment. Only if a university consistently fails to meet its commitments and only after genuine engagement would ATEC take stronger measures like applying a default compact. This is about fairness, accountability and supporting high-quality education across the broader spectrum. It's about creating a stable and universal system to support higher educational institutions and, of course, students. In the years ahead, as the government introduces needs based funding and a more sustainable growth system for students places, ATEC will help manage that growth so it's strategic and supports national priorities. It may also have a role in allocating international student commencements in the future. Importantly, equity is built into the heart of this reform. ATEC must always consider the needs of people who face barriers to education, such as First Nations students, people with disabilities, those from lower income backgrounds and Australians living in regional or remote areas. To support this, they'll have a dedicated First Nations commissioner and a First Nations advisory committee, ensuring Indigenous voices sit at the centre of decision-making. Finally, ATEC won't be working in a vacuum; it'll be consulting widely with universities, students, industry, state and tertiary governments, and communities. Every year it'll publish a state and tertiary education system report so everyone can see how we're tracking. This is very exciting news—especially for my home state of South Australia, with the high-tech defence builds that are taking place. We will need, it's estimated, over 30,000 employees over the next 10 to 15 years. Many of them will come through universities, TAFEs and higher technical learning. ATEC will play a massive role in the universities' goals and where they specialise, ensuring we're training students and people for the future positions that will exist not just in South Australia but all over Australia. When we think of education and we go back to my days in school—or your days, Deputy Speaker Young—there are now job titles and technology that weren't even dreamt of back then. This is evolving so quickly, so we need to be on top of it. As high-tech industries evolve and come to fruition, we need to be prepared with a workforce—and that workforce will come from universities and TAFEs, and through higher learning. I commend these bills to the House. It is a very good policy area that ensures we plan for the future and we plan together in partnership with our universities, TAFEs and vet courses, to ensure we produce the workforce that's required to keep this country's economy going for many years into the future.
Bolkus, Hon. Nick | Condolences | House debates
It's with great sadness that I stand here today to honour the life of Senator Nick Bolkus, who was a giant in Australian politics, a giant in South Australian public life and a groundbreaking...
It's with great sadness that I stand here today to honour the life of Senator Nick Bolkus, who was a giant in Australian politics, a giant in South Australian public life and a groundbreaking national leader. He was a wonderful mentor to me, a friend, a colleague, and someone that taught me so much about politics, and a man whose service left an undeniable mark on the state of South Australia and our nation. Today, our condolences go out to his wife, Mary; his two daughters, Aria and Mikayla; his son, Nicholas; and his sister, Anna. As I said, it is with great sadness that I stand here today. Nick's political rise was marked by a complete determination, intellect, and an unwavering belief in the possibilities of public policy. He was elected to the Australian Senate in 1980, at the 1980 federal election, beginning a remarkable 24-year tenure as one of South Australia's longest serving senators and ministers. Prior to that, he had worked and assisted many of Labor's greats, like Clyde Cameron, the industrial relations minister in the Whitlam government; Reg Bishop, who was Postmaster-General; and many others. He was a natural-born leader. He was empathetic, understanding, and he would always take the time to speak to people and learn and question and probe and grasp exactly what that particular person was and what he could learn from them. And that happened to everyone he came across. He showed me, personally, what it was like to represent a community. I was lucky to be given a place in his office to work for him. It was an opportunity that I will always be grateful for. In fact, I wouldn't be standing in this place as a member of the House of Representatives if it wasn't for Nick's probing and encouraging me to run for a seat back in the late nineties. I remember clearly the discussion we had about running for Hindmarsh back in 1998, and, I've got to say, if it weren't for Nick, I wouldn't have made that move. No doubt, without his support, his encouragement and his guidance throughout not just those years when I was a candidate and then elected but continuously, right up until recently, I know I wouldn't be here. So I thank him for the opportunity, and I'll always be grateful to Nick for that. Nick was entrusted with some of the nation's most important portfolios. He served as Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Administrative Services, Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Multicultural Affairs, where he actually helped shape modern multicultural Australia. Then, in opposition, he was shadow environment minister and shadow Attorney-General, still contributing to the nation's policies. It was during this period, the Hawke-Keating era, that Nick made his most considerable and most compassionate and far-reaching decisions, allowing thousands of Chinese nationals who were in Australia before the 1989 Tiananmen Square issue to remain permanently. Overnight he made the decision to grant visas to them along with their families, and it was a decision rooted in humanity. It gives you an idea of Nick's thought process and his beliefs. This was a decision he made that was, as I said, rooted in humanity, moral clarity and a deep belief in Australia as a nation that stands with those seeking safety and integrity. Nick was always a supporter of refugees and of making the right decision to ensure that people who were without a home and had fled their nation, their country—whether it be through war, famine or destruction—would always have an opportunity to go through the system here in this nation to be given refuge. He was a true believer in that. I think that comes from his background as well, when you look at Nick's history. His parents migrated from a little island in the eastern Aegean called Kastellorizo. They came out in the mid-twenties or thirties and made a home for themselves, first in Port Pirie, and then they moved to Adelaide, where Nick grew up in the inner city, in west Adelaide. A lot of his beliefs were grounded in, and came to fruition through, the migrant community in the western suburbs. There was a very large Greek community and Italian and Lebanese communities in western Adelaide. Nick grew up in that environment, going to Sturt Street Primary and then to Adelaide High School. If you look at his background, his parents came from this little island that had been occupied for hundreds of years by the Ottoman Empire and had then sought freedom—then it went to the Venetians and to the English. People left this island in droves, including his parents, and therefore he grew up in this environment understanding what it's like to flee or leave for a better life, and that formed his beliefs, I believe. Nick was not simply just a minister; he was also a reformer, a thinker, a principled advocate who understood the machinery of government. I had many conversations with him about these issues and policies et cetera. He used the machinery of government to deliver meaningful change. He modernised our consumer protection laws, advanced transparency in political funding and strengthened the foundations, of course, of multicultural Australia. He also achieved a milestone of profound symbolic importance: Nick Bolkus was the first Greek Australian to serve as a federal cabinet minister. It's not to say that there weren't other politicians of Greek descent before him, like Senator George Georges and some others. But Nick actually was a cabinet minister, and this was an incredible message not just to the Greek community but to many, many migrant communities who had settled in Australia. It showed that, as a son of migrants, you could be at the top level, forming policy with outcomes in legislation that benefit the community. For countless families—Greek, migrant and multicultural families—this was a very important message. We were so proud of him as a Greek community. I recall the many times when Bob Hawke, the Prime Minister of Australia, or Paul Keating or cabinet ministers would come to a Greek festival, an event of the community; these things just didn't take place prior to that. You would have rarely ever—well, never—seen a prime minister at an ethnic event prior to the late seventies and early eighties. So this was a big message saying, 'Yes, we are a government that respects you, we're a government that honours you and we're a government that understands your contribution as a migrant to this nation.' And Nick had a big influence on leaders of this nation to actually take migrant communities seriously and to take them on board and understand the importance of our multicultural communities. For countless families, as I said, of Greek migrants in Adelaide and all over Australia, it was a huge message, and it said: you belong, your contributions matter, and your story is part of Australia's story. This is the time when the thinking of Australia changed and we became a truly multicultural nation. Beyond titles and portfolios, Nick was known for his generosity—generosity of time, generosity of giving advice and generosity of just catching up and giving you his views on what he thought would be a way forward for any issues or problems that you may have had. This reached out across the political aisle. He was respected as a formidable intellect, a strategic mind and a man of deep integrity. When I say he was respected across the aisle here in this place—he was also respected internationally. I visited Greece many times, and Nick was one of the first executive members of the World Hellenic Inter-Parliamentary Association, which is a group of MPs from around the world that are of Greek descent. This was formed in 1996. Nick was on the very first executive. Through the contacts he had made—every time I visit Greece and I see politicians and have meetings, one of their first questions to me is: 'How is Nick? How's Nick going? Give him my regards.' That was especially from George Papandreou, former prime minister of Greece. I've met with him on a number of occasions. He was the former foreign affairs minister as well. His first words to me every time I'd see him in Athens were: 'How's Nick going? Give him my regards.' This is the level of respect that he had internationally. In South Australia, Nick's imprint is absolutely everywhere—in the multicultural institutions that he strengthened, the young leaders that he mentored, the families whose lives were changed by his decisions and the political landscape he helped shape over four decades. At the heart of Nick's life, of course, was his family. He leaves behind his wife, Maria; his comrade and friend Mary Patetsos, a respected community leader; and his three beautiful children, Nicholas, who is practising law and doing very well in South Australia, Aria, his daughter who is the candidate for the seat of Colton—and we wish her the very best—and Mikayla, who has gone back to legal work but worked in my office for a few years as well. All of his three children share his strategic mind, his deep generosity and his integrity. Today, we remember the man who rose from Adelaide's western district to the highest level of national leadership and a man who championed fairness, dignity and multiculturalism before those values were widely celebrated; a man who mentored generations, including myself, transformed policy and lived his life in service to others; a man who was a personal friend to many and the leading light for change. South Australia lost a dedicated servant, and Australia has lost one of its great champions.
Translating and Interpreting Services Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I rise to speak on and support the Translating and Interpreting Services Bill today because translating and interpreting services have always held a special place in Australia's story. When you...
I rise to speak on and support the Translating and Interpreting Services Bill today because translating and interpreting services have always held a special place in Australia's story. When you look at Australia's story, we look at our wonderful multicultural story. We have people that live here, that settle here, from all over the world. Language is more than words. Language carries with it its identity, dignity and the ability to feel seen and understood. It's very important. When someone arrives newly to this country or someone has perhaps been here for many years but has never been able to learn the language because of their basic education—perhaps they didn't go to school when they were very young in a war torn country, perhaps they've been here for years and have been isolated because the husband's been at work and the wife has been home or the other way round or whatever the reason—there are many circumstances that bring them to the point where they do not speak the language within the place that they live. With Australia being Australia, with such a high migrant and multicultural community, this is fundamental to what we do and who we are and a basic right that everyone deserves. There are moments when an interpreter does so much more than just translate. They open the door, they provide hope, and they are someone to listen. They are who someone can actually tell what they feel, who someone can be listened to by and who can then go on and convey that particular message to whoever it may be. We don't always get it right, and maybe sometimes we don't give translating and interpreting the importance that they deserve. I know that we regularly use translating and interpreting services in our electorate office. When we have constituents that can't speak English and speak a different language, we will engage the interpreting services for translating over the phone during a constituent meeting. The issue of translating and interpreting services is that, without that particular service, great disasters can be brought to a person's life. And I can think of two stories that I'm aware of of two people who went through a particular issue not knowing the ins and outs of it because of the language difficulties. The first one is a woman who has now passed away. When she was conveying this story to me, she was in her late 80s. She migrated from Greece in 1921. Her husband brought her out from a little island in the Aegean Sea. She spoke no English, he was at work all day, and she was having great difficulties having a baby. She couldn't conceive for whatever reason. After many, many difficulties she fell pregnant and had the child. But in childbirth she nearly died. That's all she could tell me. I asked her the question about why she didn't have any other children, and she said to me, 'Because I had a very difficult childbirth, extremely difficult, and I nearly died, I never went on to have other children.' And I said to her, 'Did you speak to doctors et cetera?' She said, 'Yes, after many years, after giving birth to my first child and thinking that it was just God's will that I wasn't having a second child, we decided to go and see a doctor 10 years after.' The question from the doctor was, 'When did you have your hysterectomy?' She had no idea because of the language barrier. Her husband couldn't speak English. There were no interpreting services in those days. And there she was for 10 years trying to have a baby, not knowing that they had performed a hysterectomy. Now they most probably saved her life. They saved her life, no doubt, at that point when she was having difficulties. But what a sad story. What a really sad story when you think about it. Now, not going back that far, only five years ago I had a particular constituent that contacted me. He would deal with our office regularly. His English was quite capable—not perfect but capable. He had been airlifted from mid-north South Australia after a horrific accident and taken to hospital to have an operation. I went to see him, because his family rang me—they were interstate—to try and find out what was happening. The nurse was explaining to me that he needed an operation immediately the next day and that it was a fairly major operation to do with his stomach and spleen et cetera. It was even technical for me, being competent in English, to understand what the actual ins and outs of this operation were. So I suggested to the head nurse in the ward at the Royal Adelaide Hospital that they arrange an interpreter for the next day, when the doctor was going to come. The interpreter obviously didn't turn up for whatever reason. He was operated on, and I went to see him after the operation because, apart from just being a constituent, he had become a very good friend. He couldn't tell me what sort of operation he'd had. They just operated on him. He said to me that he didn't know. The operation was the removal of part of his spleen and a few other things. But, again, it's another sad story. The operation most probably saved his life, but he deserved interpreting services. People in those situations need to know exactly what's happening to them, especially in health. Then we go to the courts. That's a different matter again. Your legal rights, your rights under the law—you should know and understand what your rights are. This bill before the House will strengthen interpreting services. It will streamline them and give more access to people. But it is important in a country like Australia that we ensure that people have the ability to understand. When they're going through government agencies for health care and legal matters, and even going to see the school teacher, it's sometimes a burden and there needs to be an understanding of what is said. Three weeks ago, I was in Athens, and I went to a shopping centre just to buy something—I can't remember what it was—in a supermarket. I saw a little Chinese boy. He would have been about 10. His mother obviously couldn't speak the local language at all. They were migrants. I was watching him run up to the shop attendant to tell her something in Greek, because he obviously went to school there. He would then run back to his mother and explain it to her. She would then tell him what product they were after. Finally, they got the product they wanted. It reminded me of many migrant stories here in Australia, with kids as young as 10, 11 and 12 interpreting for neighbours who couldn't speak English—and even me for my parents on many occasions, even though their English was fairly competent, and for friends. I still do it today. I still get people coming into the electorate office with letters saying, 'What does this say?' So it's not just an extra service that we throw on top just to make it look good. It is important. It is absolutely critical to a country like Australia. We want people to be part of our community and to participate in everything we offer that is fantastic in this country. We want people to feel like they are part of the community. We don't want to see horror stories, where people are having hysterectomies and not knowing that they've had one because there was no-one to interpret or to explain to them at that point what was happening, or like in Bill's case at the Royal Adelaide Hospital, where he had half his spleen taken out and a whole range of other things through that operation and had no idea what was being done. I'm not saying that he would have said no, but it would have been good to know. It's good to know what you're doing. We accept it as part of our everyday life. Translating and interpreting services are absolutely vital. This bill introduces a dedicated legal framework that actually outlines how the Department of Home Affairs will administer and deliver translating and interpreting services through the translating and interpreting service system. But, beyond the legal language, what it really does is protect something deeply human and something deeply important to people—and that is having the information that involves their actions, whether they say yes or no. We all know that we have a right to say yes or no to things that are being offered to us. This is one of those areas where issues that relate to health, to legal matters, to a whole range of things are so important. It's been part of Australia's fabric for generations. The interpreting service started in '47, when we agreed on the Migration Act to bring over many migrants in a planned manner. We decided back then in 1947, as a nation, as a result of the post-World War II migration program, that we needed interpreting services for those people. Over the decades, the interpreter services have grown alongside Australia's multicultural communities. And we want them to grow. We want them to be strong, and we want to ensure that every single person has access to an interpreting service if required.
Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member for Brisbane will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.
Economy | Matters of Public Importance | House debates
Economy | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer update the House on the interest rates decision taken this afternoon by the Reserve Bank.
Energy | Matters of Public Importance | House debates
I thank the government whip. Member for Cook, direct your comments through the chair. There were a couple of points where you were directing questions to the bench on my right. For everyone, just...
I thank the government whip. Member for Cook, direct your comments through the chair. There were a couple of points where you were directing questions to the bench on my right. For everyone, just ensure that all comments are made through this chair.
The member will resume his seat. The Chief Government Whip, the member for Lalor.
Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I'm very pleased to support the Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025. I support this bill, as all of us on this side of the House do, for many, many reasons. When we...
I'm very pleased to support the Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025. I support this bill, as all of us on this side of the House do, for many, many reasons. When we look at the history of migration to Australia, we know it's been at the core of our labour force, from the first settlers that came here—and when you think of the history, you think of convicts being brought to Australia and forced into labour for a number of years before they became free settlers. Then there was a mass promotion to bring free settlers here to populate and work the land. When you think of the history, even people from Fiji came to work with the sugarcanes in that period, in those early days when we first planted sugarcanes in northern Australia. We then had mass migration from Europe, for our manufacturing and for our factories. Then we went a step further and considered southern Europeans as white Europeans; prior to that, they weren't considered white—people from my race, for example. They were brought out from 1949 onwards to fill the factories of Australia and do hard labour. If you look at the history, we have continuously relied on migrant workers, whether it be to populate the nation, fill certain skills or just fill the shortfalls in labour. From time to time, that changes, and, of course, governments should always be monitoring what the needs of the nation are in terms of skills, workforce and population to be able to benefit the nation. I think this government, the Albanese Labor government, is tackling those hard issues. One of the things that is fundamental to workers—regardless of where you're from and whether you've been here for eight or nine generations or whether you've just arrived—is to ensure that we do all that we can as legislators to ensure that those people aren't being exploited. That is very important. That's a fundamental human right. People have the right to work under the same conditions as everyone else, to receive the same pay and to be able to flourish at their jobs and have the same opportunities as anyone. It's very important that we also ensure that bringing in migrant workers is not just an exploitation of being able to bring in cheap labour. That is really important. I've said many times in this place—and I think even I mentioned it yesterday—that, in 1949, when we were going to make agreements with southern Europe, Italy, Greece, the former Yugoslav republic and other places to bring workers over, there was a debate in this place. One side of the debate was that these migrant workers should be brought in on less pay. That was the debate in 1949 in this House. It was the unions and Labor that argued strongly against that because we could see that would be a spiralling to the bottom. Again I'll repeat what I've said many times: can you imagine, if that had gotten through back then, what sort of nation we would be today? Just think about where we would be today. We'd be a very different country. We wouldn't be as egalitarian as we are. So it gives me great pleasure to see bills that protect workers' rights, especially people who are in vulnerable positions—migrants who are brought out to do certain work. Now, I'm not saying that's the case. The majority, 99.9 per cent, I think, would be genuine, people that have a real need in their business. They have a real need for a particular skill or a niche market and cannot fill that position, so therefore they'll bring someone from overseas. We've seen that over the years. Back in the day—I spoke about the fifties et cetera—we looked at the numbers that were required in factories and what we needed to populate the nation and brought people over. Immediately, they were put on permanent visas and could stay here forever. Much simpler, much easier—it was a different world back then. A lot of those workers coming in were for unskilled labour. Today we have a completely different migration policy. It's intertwined with work skills, points in regional areas and state governments having certain needs that other states don't have, and it is very, very complicated. What we want to ensure, though, is that, when we are bringing someone in from overseas to fill a particular position, that need is a real need, not just an excuse to be able to bring someone in at a cheaper salary or wage. That's why I was very pleased when we increase the base salaries for migrant skilled workers from $53,000 to $70,000. That brings it up to a level where our average wages are, because, as I said, you could quite easily see a spiralling to the bottom. It gives me great pleasure to support this bill, as I said, for many reasons, including as the Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration. I understand the vital contribution, from what we see on the committee, that migrants make to our economy. I think all of us would agree with that. There is no doubt that migrants have made enormous contributions to our society. I understand the need to better protect and advocate for those migrant workers, who come in on migrant visas to fill positions. The committee is currently conducting an inquiry into skilled migration—which is perfect, when you think about it. It matches with this bill. We know the economic, social and cultural value that skilled migrants bring to our nation, but we also know that the system isn't perfect. We still need to do more work to refine and modify, to ensure that everything is done to address our skills shortfalls, to ensure that those migrants are protected so they feel comfortable and safe and also to ensure that our future needs as a nation are being met. For example, in South Australia we're on the cusp of an incredible, cutting-edge manufacturing technology revolution through the AUKUS deal and through defence building in South Australia. We know that there are skills we don't have at this point that we must fill. When we're looking at migrant workers or skilled migration to Australia, we should also be looking at the other side of it, and that is the future—the training of our students, of our young people, to give them the expertise in those areas to fill those positions. It's only my pet project, but I personally would go a step further: if you are going to bring someone in from overseas to fill a particular position, you should also be training two local people at the same time to give them the skills and expertise to fill those positions in the future. But that's my personal view. We know that migrants bring enormous skills to this nation; they also benefit the economy. Every migrant that comes in has needs. If they have a family, they'll buy food, they'll invest, they'll buy furniture et cetera, which keeps our economy going. That's another area where there is a fine equation that has to be weighed up—the economy, the unemployment rate and the intake of migrants. As I said earlier, when you think of our history of migration, you see people from all over the world—every corner of the world—that have made Australia their home. With them they bring their skills and their abilities to contribute to our economy. Recently I was speaking to a big construction company in South Australia that specialises in heritage buildings, and they were telling me: 'We have no stonemasons at all. It's one of the most difficult positions to fill when you're reconstructing a heritage building.' The only place they could get a stonemason, who are absolutely skilful workers, was Albania. We worked very hard to help this person get his visa. He's set up his own company now. He came over as a skilled worker and has now set up his own company, employing 20 or 30 people, doing stonemasonry in South Australia. What a great story! He came over as a skilled migrant on a temporary visa for a period of time to fill that position. We assisted him, and he ended up getting a permanent visa. He's now an Australian citizen, his kids are at university and he's employing 20 or 30 people doing stonemasonry—one of the only such companies in South Australia. There are hundreds and hundreds of stories like that. But that particular person was working in secure employment with a good employer that looked after him and paid him the correct rates—in fact, above what the minimum wage was for stonemasons. In his situation, everything went well for him. We've also heard horror stories. There are some horror stories where people don't know where to go or what to do. For example, a few years back I was contacted by some migrant workers from India who had had their passports taken away from them in a particular restaurant. They were too scared to complain and too scared to knock on someone's door to ask for help until a third party came to our office. We put them on to the then miscellaneous workers union—UWU, as they're called today—who assisted them. In fact, that particular business was shut down. Some of those migrant workers returned to India and others stayed here and made their home in Australia. But there are horror stories around—only a few, but they happen—and we should be doing all that we can to wipe those horror stories out and assist successful skilled migration to Australia to fill the positions that we have needs in, to assist the economy but also to ensure that we build our own skills as well. That's why I commend this bill.
Racial Discrimination Act 1975: 50th Anniversary | Statements on Significant Matters | House debates
I congratulate the member for Barton for putting it so eloquently and so well. It's just great to see some of these young people that are here today in our parliament. When I compare it to the...
I congratulate the member for Barton for putting it so eloquently and so well. It's just great to see some of these young people that are here today in our parliament. When I compare it to the parliament that I joined in 2004 and the faces all around us, how it's changed and how it's changed for the better is just incredible. When I see members like the member for Barton, it gives me great joy that we are finally coming of age in this parliament. We still have a long way to go, but we're just coming to that point where we are truly a reflection of our communities. It's so important to ensure that we honour and celebrate those things—just as it's important to honour and celebrate milestones in our political history, such as the 50th anniversary of the Racial Discrimination Act. The Racial Discrimination Act was the cornerstone of our modern-day society in ensuring that everyone was treated equal under the law, even though that was the case under our Constitution. This value-added to the significant pieces of legislation in Australia's history. It was a cornerstone of our journey towards becoming a truly multicultural nation but also a truly egalitarian nation. This landmark act came into effect on Friday 31 October 1975, under the Whitlam Labor government. It was the first legislation of its kind in Australia to focus squarely on human rights and to prohibit discrimination on the basis of race. So what did that mean? It meant that, even though we had a Constitution that looked at all of us equally and fairly—unless you were of Aboriginal descent, of course; we know that it took many years to come up to the mark there, and we still have a long way to go. But what this meant was that under the law you could not be vilified on the basis of race. It embodied a principle that has long been part of our Australian spirit. The Racial Discrimination Act gave life to Australia's commitment under the UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. It signalled a new direction for our nation—a future built on acceptance, inclusion and respect for all cultures. This legislation protects people across Australia from unfair treatment based on race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin in many areas of public life. It also ensures equal footing and preserves fundamental freedoms. It goes further by prohibiting insults, humiliation and vilification—actions that deny basic human rights. In short, it guarantees equal enjoyment and exercise of those rights for all Australians. We've seen some pretty horrific things on our TV news and other media on national days such as Anzac Day and just recently, a couple of weeks ago, on Remembrance Day. There are certain groups that take great enjoyment in vilifying people and ensuring that people are made to feel lesser than all of us. Those are areas where governments and police et cetera can take action because of this particular act. If you removed this act from 50 years ago, there would not be much action that you could take against groups like that. So it is squarely one of our fundamental laws in this country that ensures that equality that I spoke about and the rights of everyone to coexist in a respectful way. At the heart of the act is section 18C, which provides protection against racial vilification. Alongside it is section 18D, which offers exemptions for actions done in good faith, such as artistic works, research et cetera. The pathway to getting this act through wasn't easy. It is testament to the determination and grit of then senator Lionel Murphy, as Attorney-General, who introduced the bill into the Senate not once but three times. Three times it was introduced, and it was rejected—voted against—all three times. It's something just mind boggling, if you think about it today, that a racial discrimination act to ensure that everyone's rights are protected had people in this place voting against it. The debate was divided. But the Whitlam government understood that the bill was more than just another bill or more than just law; it was about social change. We see the fruits of that social change today. Attorney-General Kep Enderby said at the time: … the Bill will perform an important educative role. In addition, the introduction of legislation will furnish legal background on which to rest changes reflecting basic community attitudes. The fact that racial discrimination is unlawful will make it easier for people to resist social pressures that result in discrimination. Australian laws exist to express the values of a civilised society. The Whitlam government reflected the future of where we are today and the current values of Australia: a multicultural country that embraces diversity and is proud of it. When I think of our diggers that died in World War I, in Gallipoli, and right through World War II, and I think of the many theatres of war that we've engaged in—Afghanistan, Vietnam—it's all about the individual freedom, the ability to be free in a nation with a vibrant democracy, where everyone is treated equally regardless of race, religion, the colour of their skin et cetera. Going back to part 18C, which forms a very important part of this act, it hasn't been without its challenges. Section 18C, the core protection against racial vilification, came under threat not that long ago. In 2016—or maybe it was 2014—the then Attorney-General of the coalition government introduced and argued for a bill proposing the repeal of 18C. It would have basically meant people would have had the right to be bigots, if that had gone through back then. How could we allow that? How could we permit open racism and discrimination to creep back into our society? Imagine if that bill had passed. Australia would not be the country it is today. Migrant families could have been relegated to a second-class citizenship and denied the fair life that they deserved. I've made this statement in this place a couple of times that, if you think back to when we were negotiating mass migration in the late 1940s, there was a mindset in this place before the bills went through that enabled us to bring migrants in to fill labour shortages and basically 'populate or perish'. The argument was that migrant workers should be paid less than Australian workers. That was the argument that was taking place in this chamber back then. Thank God the unions and the Labor Party relentlessly disagreed to it. Can you imagine what sort country that Australia would be today had that gone through? So you need people with foresight like Mr Whitlam and Lionel Bowen to ensure we put acts into place that preserve those rights, preserve dignity and preserve an equal society that ensures everyone is treated fairly, which is in our Constitution. But you also have to insure against that ability of vilification to creep in. It could creep in slowly but gradually and then become a mass vilification, and we could have an entire upheaval of our society. So that's why this law from 50 years ago that we're discussing today is worth celebrating. And it's worth honouring, because it's laws like this that give the direction of the country. They change the country and benefit future generations, as we see today in our wonderful multicultural Australia that actually treats everyone fairly. We have good laws in place. Regardless of your religion, your ethnicity and your place of birth, we ensure that people are treated equally with the same opportunity and can have the same hopes for future that everyone has.
Personal Information and Privacy | Constituency Statements | House debates
We live in an era where information flows faster than ever before. Protecting what little privacy we have left is so important. Every day we're asked to share more and more of our personal...
We live in an era where information flows faster than ever before. Protecting what little privacy we have left is so important. Every day we're asked to share more and more of our personal details, which often go far beyond what's necessary. Every year, Australians do the right thing. They fill out and return their tax forms, abiding by the law and contributing to the system that supports our nation. As a government, we have a responsibility to do the right thing by them, to respect their privacy and to protect their personal information. Recently, a constituent of mine contacted me to discuss something that caught his attention: on page eight of the tax return for individuals in 2025, there is a question asking applicants to specify their spouse's gender. The options are male, female or intermediate. He started to wonder why this question is asked when, both earlier and later in the form, it asks for your spouse's date of birth, first name and surname—therefore having all the details. One has to ask: Why? Why is this question in there? Why does the ATO need to know the gender of your spouse? What purpose does this serve? Does it affect the amount of tax you pay? Does one receive a benefit for being in a heterosexual relationship? Does one receive a benefit for being in a same-sex relationship? Or is there a penalty for being in either one of those relationships? Of course not—so why is this question there? Why is this question there? That's what this constituent is asking. This issue, as I said, was raised by a constituent in Adelaide, who wrote to me with genuine concern, and I couldn't agree more with their questions. We're told to accept people for who they are, to respect diversity and individuality, yet here we are asking Australians to disclose personal details that have absolutely no relevance to their tax obligations. This is not a census. This is a tax return. It's not the census that we do every few years, where we want to know lots of details. It is a tax return form. Its purpose is to calculate income and ensure compliance with tax law, not to collect unnecessary demographic data. So I ask again: what does the gender of a spouse have to do with claiming one's taxed income? As I said, we live in a society overflowing with information. Every click, every form and every interaction leaves a digital footprint. With that comes a responsibility—a responsibility to ask only what is necessary and nothing more. If we do not need to know, then we should not ask. The gender of your spouse does not matter in the context of a tax return, so why should it be included in the 2026 tax return form? It shouldn't. I've written to the Assistant Treasurer to ask these questions and to ask why this is in there, and hopefully I'll have an answer soon. We must protect what little privacy remains, because once it's gone we will never get it back.
Excise Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It gives me great pleasure to speak on the Excise Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025 and the associated bill. These bills will help pubs, clubs and breweries across our country, across our...
It gives me great pleasure to speak on the Excise Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025 and the associated bill. These bills will help pubs, clubs and breweries across our country, across our electorates and across our states, and will deliver a simple, long-overdue measure—that is, pausing the indexation on draught beer excise and excise equivalent customs duty rates for two years. This will be a real relief. This will be a real-money-in-people's-pockets policy. I'm very pleased to be speaking on these bills and supporting them. With bills like these, we are supporting the great pubs, clubs, sporting clubs et cetera of our nation. Think of your iconic pub. There is nothing more Australiana than a local pub, than being in the front bar with people and talking to them. I've campaigned in plenty of pubs over the years, believe me. I've been a frequent customer in many of them in my electorate because I enjoy them. I feel like it is part of our culture. I enjoy the conversations and I enjoy meeting people. For members of parliament, it is the best place to hear what people have got to say and what the realities of this world are. When you think of pubs, you also think of the hard work that goes into running a pub. You look at publicans, and a lot of pubs are still run by families, especially in my electorate. I give a shout-out to some of those pubs, and to the Franzon family at the Hilton hotel—and I'm not talking about the Conrad Hiltons and the five-star Hiltons; I'm talking about the workers of the Hilton in the suburb of Hilton in my electorate, run by James Franzon. It was run by his father, Bob Franzon, for many years. Bob was affectionately known as 'Bob the Hat' because he always wore a hat. He passed away a number of years ago but his son James has taken over the business. We talk regularly, when I'm down there with James, about the industry and how hard it is, and the long hours they put into running a successful pub. The Hilton hotel today has changed completely from the Hilton of many years ago. In fact, it was my first encounter with a pub. As a young schoolboy, I used to sell newspapers outside ETSA, the Electricity Trust of South Australia, which was right opposite the Hilton hotel. The workers would finish at 4 pm and come out. I would sell the papers, and then, with whatever was left, I'd walk into the Hilton hotel, into the front bar and the saloon, and get rid of the rest of the papers. That was my first interaction—and occasionally I'd get a nice tip from someone who'd perhaps had a beer too many! There is Peter Hurley, of the Hotel Royal and the Arkaba Hotel. They are great businesses that, through hard work, have become successful businesses and community pubs. In my own neighbourhood is the Arab Steed, which I still frequent occasionally on Saturdays; I have a bit of a flutter if I've got nothing to do on a Saturday afternoon, which is very rare. I see the hard work that Shayne White and Jill White put into running the Arab Steed. They've been long-term owners of that pub. It feels like a real family when you walk into that front bar. There are the regulars, the publicans and people that know each other and are friendly. We have many, many pubs in my electorate—I could name thousands of them—but one that stands out is the Wheatsheaf Hotel in Thebarton, which is run by Jade Flavell. It's known for its significant role in developing the Wheatsheaf's reputation as one of the premier craft beer venues in South Australia. They run a great show down there, with live bands. There are no pokies; they made a decision not to have pokies. This pub was run by the Brown family—Bob Brown and his wife—for many, many years. I used to go to school with Wayne Brown, their son, and many were the days where, when we were kids, we'd be running up and down the stairs of the Wheatsheaf Hotel. These are real, iconic institutions in the electorate of Adelaide. These are pubs that have been run by families for years and years. This bill, therefore, is a great bill that will relieve some of that pressure. This will help the workers that work in pubs, whether they're in kitchens as a kitchenhand, cook or chef, are the cleaners of pubs or are bar staff. This will help all people connected to bars and pubs around the nation. As I said, this automatic, twice-yearly increase to duty rates on draught beer every February and August has been a cause of frustration for many years for publicans in hospitality venues and patrons alike, because the end result is the patron pays more. It's something the AHA has been advancing for many years. This has compounded cost for venues and added stress. Industry stakeholders like some of the ones I mentioned earlier have all spoken to me about the excise tax, but they've previously made calls for support and focused on changes to alcohol excise and taxation arrangements. The AHA of South Australia—David Basheer is the president and also the owner of the Strathmore Hotel and other hotels in my electorate—has said: This freeze is a win for socialising, your local and most importantly jobs, at a time when cost-of-living is impacting everyone. That was the AHA of South Australia. The national CEO said: This is a win for the millions of men and women who like to go down to their local and have a beer. It's a win for common-sense in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis—every little bit makes a difference. I agree with David Basheer and others who have been calling for this—the other publicans and hotel owners in the industry. We must do all that we can. Rising excise rates through biannual indexation, business costs and cost-of-living impacts have been reported by industry and the media as putting pressure on the survival of businesses in the alcohol industry. This measure supports around 10,000 hospitality venues across Australia—pubs, bars, taverns and clubs—about 75 per cent of which are small businesses. This freeze will provide crucial breathing space for small hospitality businesses. Not only does this support the venues; it protects the thousands of those hardworking Australians that the pubs employ. Across South Australia alone—in my state—about 60,000 people are employed in accommodation and food services, as bar staff and in hospitality. In my electorate of Adelaide alone, the sector employs 4,461 males and 4,250 females. The hospitality industry has a large proportion of young workers—especially representing a seat with the CBD in the middle of it. Many of them are uni students and part-time workers, with 2,593 workers between the ages of 25 and 34 years old. Many of these workers are employed part time or gaining experience, often without— ( Q uorum formed) I will kick off where I left off—praising the wonderful workers, the employees, who are dedicated, who are pouring beers, cooking meals and serving guests. This bill, as I said, acts as a buffer against financial pressure, helping businesses to stay open and keeping young workers employed. I already gave the numbers in my electorate. Around Australia, there are thousands and thousands of young students employed in the pub industry, working part-time, helping to support their studies. This will be a help to them. They will also get their student debt cut this week as well, so it will be a double help for lots of uni students. The hospitality sector in Adelaide is more than an industry; it is a key connection to our identity. I mentioned some of those iconic pubs in my electorate. The Hilton Hotel that I used to visit quite regularly was a pub where the local Lions Club would meet, the local football club would meet and even our branch of the Labor Party would meet in there on a regular basis. Over many elections, we had election night events in the Hilton Hotel. For those of you hearing 'Hilton Hotel', it is not the Conrad Hilton; this is a Hilton Hotel, named after the suburb called Hilton in a very working-class area of Adelaide. These pubs are community pubs. Up the road, the Royal Hotel, which was run by Peter Hurley, again, is a great community pub that supports soccer clubs, football clubs, the local dart club and a whole range of other groups that meet there—from Lions Clubs to different community groups. They play an important role, they are a community centre and people gravitate to them. If you are on your own, for example, it is a great place to go and talk to people. They not only provide a wonderful service but, more importantly, they employ so many thousands of people. Therefore, this bill is very important in supporting the pubs and hospitality industry. The draft beer excise freeze may seem modest but it helps where it matters most—that is, small and local businesses. As I said, I regularly meet with local traders. Many publicans I speak to tell me that the cost-of-living crisis is hurting their business. This freeze will help to alleviate input costs, giving them better stability and certainty, not only helping them keep the doors open but also helping them plan ahead. The hospitality sector is not just for employment; it represents something bigger. Many of us in our speeches here have tried to explain that bars, pubs and other venues are the heart of local communities. I am sure every member of parliament here speaks to people in pubs. They are the best place to actually gauge what the views are of the public out there. They are places to catch up with your friends, mates, to have a beer, to go to weekly trivia nights, and to celebrate local sporting teams after a game. They bring people together. They connect Australians. In Adelaide, we're spoiled for choice with such amazing venues. I've mentioned some of them. There are others: Exeter Hotel, the British Hotel, the Strathmore, Cumberland Arms Hotel—great pubs. Currently, I frequent the Arab Steed in my neighbourhood occasionally, as I said, on a Saturday afternoon if I don't have anything on, which is very rare. We may go there with my wife and have lunch and a bit of a flutter on the TAB. It's an outing, it's a great opportunity to talk to people and to meet people, and I see firsthand the hard work of those publicans, who play an important role in our economy, in employing people and in just having a community—like a community centre—there for everyone. At the same time, we want them to flourish and we want their businesses to flourish.
Medicare | Private Members' Business | House debates
There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour.
Gas Industry | Private Members' Business | House debates
Is there a seconder for the member for Bradfield's motion?
Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.
Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
Order, both members on both sides. I'm not going to have banter between both sides. It's through the chair that you ask the questions, and you're speaking through the chair.