Scott Morrison's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Valedictory | Parliamentary Representation | House debates
Thank you to all those who have joined us here in the chamber today. I am going to commence my final contribution to this place in the same way I began my first one, in acknowledging the Gweagal...
Thank you to all those who have joined us here in the chamber today. I am going to commence my final contribution to this place in the same way I began my first one, in acknowledging the Gweagal people of the Dharawal nation of southern Sydney—a very special people, because they were the first to engage with Lieutenant James Cook on 29 April 1770. That place in Kurnell is a very special place. We speak a lot about reconciliation in this place, as we should, and my experience of that place as each and every year we gather in a ceremony of reconciliation, I think, speaks to the best spirit of that. I also spoke about that place in my maiden speech in this place. I said that it was important that we recognise this site, and I am so pleased that over the time that I have been here, we were able to achieve that. On that site now, there is—artists call it an installation, others would call it a monument, and some might call it a statue—call it whatever you like, but I know what it means. There is the totem of the Dharawal people, the whale, and it's beautiful. There are many other installations around the shore, but the one which is most striking, as the tide comes in, laps on it and recedes, is the skeleton of a whale, but it is also the skeleton of a ship like the Endeavour. On each of the rings of that skeleton is inscribed the journals of Lieutenant James Cook. If you haven't been there, go there. It is a wonderful place to reflect on how two stories become one. For me that's what reconciliation with Indigenous people has always been about. We weave together the individual strands of individual Australians of so many different backgrounds and experiences, from our Indigenous peoples to the most recent citizens. Each strand unique, but together weaved as one. For me that site will always mean that, and it's wonderful to acknowledge it here today, as well as the artists and the so many who made that possible. As was my practice as Prime Minister, always, when acknowledging Indigenous Australians, I would also in the same breath acknowledge those men and women who served Australia in our defence forces, both those who served in the past and those who serve now, for the simple reason that they are the providers of our freedom. Everything we have in this country we owe to them. In one of my early days—the member for Blaxland is here—we trekked Kokoda together in the spirit of bipartisanship. He was a little quicker than me and still is. We trekked Sandakan, we trekked the Black Cat Track up there in northern Papua New Guinea and we also went on to Gallipoli. At the end of those treks we would stand together with the young people who were with us—whether it was at the Bomana cemetery or in Lae or Sandakan or elsewhere—and we would hold hands, look at those tombstones, thank them and commit ourselves to living lives that would be worthy of their sacrifice. It was incredibly moving. And we would say, 'They gave their tomorrows for our today.' So it is easy for us all in that spirit to acknowledge our defence forces, those who serve in them—and serve in them today, far from here and nearby—and simply say thank you for your service. Today is not an opportunity to run through a bullet point list of things. It is, importantly, an opportunity for me to simply express my thanks and appreciation and admiration for those who have made my service here in this place possible and to pass on what I hope are some helpful reflections from my time here that may assist those who continue to serve. Let me begin with my thankyous. Firstly and importantly, to my constituents in Cook: it has been my great privilege to have served you as your local member in this parliament for these past more than 16 years, where you have been kind enough to elect me on six separate—six successive—occasions. I thank you for the tremendous and steadfast support you've provided to me and my family, who join me here today, during this time. Whatever was going on at the time, whether it be success, failure and everything in between, when I returned to the electorate—and those who know the area will know what I'm talking about—and particularly as I went up the rise of the Captain Cook Bridge and descended into God's country itself, the shire, I would feel a great sense of belonging. I would feel a great sense of reassurance and peace. All of us who live there know this. This is as much, though, about the people as it is the place. It is home and always will be. Mine is a community that is unashamedly proud of our country, that deeply values family life and what it takes to live a life that keeps families together, that works hard. They take responsibility for themselves. They appreciate and respect both their own and others' good fortune, and they are generous to those around them, celebrating their successes or providing a hand up whenever and wherever it is needed. It is also a community that enthusiastically shares and supports and maintains the important community and social infrastructure that preserves our way of life. It is a community that does not leave it to others, including the government. Mine is a community that does not look for what it is owed but what it can contribute, for how it can make a contribution, not take one, both nationally and locally. They are a community of patriots, and I am pleased to describe them as such in this place. In both my local and my national roles, including as Prime Minister, I have always been guided by the strong local values of my community—family, community, small business—and what I describe as the fair go for those who have a go. This is what makes the shire and southern Sydney such a great place to live and raise a family. And there are plenty of quiet Australians who understand that as well. Ever since I was first elected, I have always seen it as my job to try and keep it that way, and I believe I have honoured that commitment. I particularly thank the myriad of community organisations, sporting clubs, school communities, volunteers, small businesses, church and charitable groups that make our local community, as they do all of our communities, so great and so resilient, including my beloved Sharks. These groups and organisations are the heart of our community, and I've always enjoyed the role I have played to support and enable them in their efforts, and I'm proud of what we have been able to achieve altogether in our community over this time. I also want to thank my many local Liberal Party supporters and members, in particular Mike Douglas; Louise De Domenico, who was also on my staff; and my conference chairman and great friend, Scott Briggs, for always keeping the local show on the road. A special thank you also to our neighbours and friends in Lilli Pilli, Port Hacking and Dolans Bay. You had to put up with more than most—cameras, security, traffic, the odd protest and home invader. To Jamie and Anna and to Joe, Chrissie and Stan, I look forward to continuing return the favour of mowing your lawns for years to come. It will be quite some time before I settle that debt! A big thank you also—I'm sure Jenny would agree—to Rob and everyone up at D'lish. As politicians we know that we are the tip end of the spear. Yet, behind us, there are so many people who we are supported by. They are incredible, dedicated, professional, intelligent, loyal, good humoured, sacrificial and amazing people who, for reasons that I suspect will never cease to amaze all of us—and it certainly humbles us—choose to commit themselves to the causes that we have identified and we seek to champion as members of this place and, when we have the opportunity, in government. They become a family. They support one another. They form close and lasting relationships, together embarking on one of the great seasons of our lives. I have been blessed in this area more than I could ever deserve. From my local office team in the shire, especially to Julie Adams; to the incredible professionals who headed up and worked in my prime ministerial and ministerial offices, especially Dr John Kunkel, Phil Gaetjens and Anne Duffield; and to my longstanding original staff Latisha Wenlock and Julian Leembruggen, who is here today: the journey would simply have been impossible without you all, all of those you ably led and all who worked together in these causes, so many of whom are here today—and I thank them for being here. There are too many of you to mention all by name, and nor do I wish to injure your reputations by doing so! But I hope you all feel the full partnership of our service together and what we were able to achieve and contribute. Thank you. I also wish to thank all those who cared for me and my family over the years when I was Prime Minister, as the Prime Minister now would know. To our household staff at the Lodge and at Kirribilli, led by the beautiful Trina Barrie and the incomparable Adam Thomas: you provided a space for Jen, Abbey, Lily, Buddy, Charlie and I to be a family. Thank you. To the members of my close protection team at the AFP over the years, who continue to look after us even on the odd occasion these days: thank you. I want to specially mention Travis Ford and Jen McRae, who were terribly injured in the line of duty, protecting me in a terrible car accident in Tasmania. I will always be grateful for your sacrifice. When their colleagues rushed to them at the scene, their first words—not knowing what had occurred—were: 'Is the boss okay?' Thank you. To Mick: I'll be in touch about that fishing trip we talked about, as we promised each other on the road on so many occasions. To my parliamentary, ministerial and cabinet colleagues with whom I served over the years, some gone from this place now and many still here: I want to thank you for your support and your dedication. As your leader, you gave me your best in some of Australia's most difficult times. I asked you to follow and you did, and together we achieved an election victory that none thought possible, and we kept steady hands on the tiller during the greatest set of challenges that have confronted our nation since the Second World War. Thank you for your service. For the opportunities afforded to me by my party leaders over this time—to Brendon Nelson, to Prime Minister Tony Abbott and to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull: thank you. To my now party leader, Peter Dutton, with whom I served in cabinet through all the years of the coalition government: thank you for your respect, your loyalty, your support and your consideration, especially that which you've shown me as a ministerial colleague, as Prime Minister and as an ex-PM in your party room. Jen and I both appreciate the kindness and generosity you and Kirilly have shown to both of us and our family. For the great friendship and encouragement afforded to me by some very special friends as colleagues, to Big Mac, my Deputy Prime Minister, Michael McCormack; and Catherine: thank you. To Josh Frydenberg, who I was speaking with this morning, and my deputy leader and Treasurer: thank you, Josh. To Marise Payne, to Greg Hunt, to Michaelia Cash, to good old Benny Morton and to Alex Hawke, who sits with me here today and who keeps me entertained each question time still—there's plenty to entertain us: thank you. And to those who've gone from here—to Steve Irons and Stuart Robert, who I flatted with for many years; to Lucy Wicks and the incomparable Bill Heffernan, who I flatted with for the first six years and survived; and Louise Markus—thank you. To the broader Liberal Party members and our supporters led by Andrew Hirst, John Olsen and Nick Greiner, thank you. To those who supported me from the Public Service as a minister, Treasurer and Prime Minister, thank you, especially for your service during the pandemic, which I extend to everyone in the Public Service, who showed the true spirit of what public service was with sacrifice and dedication. Thank you to Phil Gaetjens, who was the head of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, but, particularly, thank you also to Professor Brendan Murphy and Professor Paul Kelly, who became well-known figures. To General JJ Frewen, thank you. To General Angus Campbell and Greg Moriarty, thank you for all you did to help me secure AUKUS. When I left the job after the last election, when we lost, I remember saying to them, 'Now, please don't stuff it up,' which they are not, together with the Minister for Defence. To the Prime Minister, to the Deputy Prime Minister, to the members of your government and to Bill Shorten, we have contested fiercely in this place. I've had my wins and I've had my losses, but I wish you all well in your service of the national interest. Too often in this place we confuse differences of policy with judgements about peoples' intent and motives. This is not good for our polity. We may disagree but we need to honour the good intentions of all of us. I wish you well in your service, as I've said, and I especially want to thank you, Mr Speaker, for the special kindness and respect that you've shown to me in this place since the last election and here again today. To the Prime Minister and your now new fiancee, Jodie, congratulations on your engagement. Jen and I wish you all the very best for your life together. At some point, this all ends and, while there are no hard feelings, I'll obviously be supporting my colleagues and Peter Dutton to ensure that that day hastens sooner rather than later. But, when it does, you will look around and Jodie will be there, and I can assure you—as Jen has been to me—it makes a world of difference. When I first entered politics, the former member for Parramatta, Julie Owens, who many of us remember well, gave new members some good advice at our orientation about making sure you do not neglect the friendships you had before you came. I took this advice very seriously. I'm even more pleased that my friends and family did. Thank you to our wonderful friends that are here today—to Karen and Adrian Harrington; to David Gazard, the 'Gaza man'; to Arthur and Ingrid Ilias; to Bill and Anne Knock; to Peter Verwer; to Scott Briggs, who couldn't be here today; and to Lynelle Stewart—we love you very much and appreciate you. To my Christian pastors, Brad and Alison Bonhomme, to Mike and Val Murphy, to Joel and Julia A'bell, to Jock Cameron and to my brothers in Christ, Andrew Scipione, John Anderson and Lloyd Thomas, who's here with his wife Fi today, thank you for your prayers, your counsel and your encouragement. I also especially want to thank Bishop Antoine Tarabay and all of our Maronite brothers and sisters—I've become an honorary Maronite, I think, in the years past—and especially our dear friends Danny and Leila Abdallah, Bridget Sakr and Craig McKenzie, who have taught us all what faith is really all about. As most people know, subject only to God, my family is the centre of my life, and at the very centre of our family is Jen. I cannot imagine life without her. I love you, Jen, and always will—that is the cross you have to bear. Your love has been my stay and strength. You are the other half of our joined soul, who, by the grace of God, brought Abbey and Lily—our miracle girls—into our lives, who we celebrate and love. I thank Abbey and Lily for their own sacrifices as they have grown, necessitated by having a father in public life. They are beautiful girls in every way, as you can see, and I could not be more proud of them as a father. They are our joy and our delight, and I am so pleased that we can now have the time that was necessarily denied us for so long. In preparing for this day, Abbey and Lily suggested that I should play a type of Taylor Swift bingo, and I'm wearing the bracelet, by the way—it has 'ScoMo' on it. They said to try to work the names of every single Taylor Swift album into my remarks. Well, what's a dad to do? Here I go! It is true that my political opponents have often made me see red. When subjected to the tortured poets who would rise to attack my reputation, in response I have always thought it important to be fearless and speak now or forever hold my silence and allow those attacks to become folklore. Ever since leaving university—in 1989!—this has always been my approach. My great consolation has always been my lover Jen, who has always been there for me whenever I need her, from dawn and beyond the many midnights we have shared together. See, I'm actually a true new romantic after all. I can assure you there is no bad blood, as I've always been someone who's been able to shake it off! Anything for my daughters. I also want to thank, of course, Jen's mum, Beth, who is looking after the cat and the dog today, and Jen's late father, Roy, an amazing human being, for always being on my side; as well as Jen's siblings, Gary and Cecily, and all their families. Finally, I thank my mum, Marion, who is here with my late father, John, today together. I also want to thank my brother, Alan, of whom I am extremely proud. My family, growing up, were the dominant example for my life. They taught me that life is about what you contribute, not what you accumulate. They taught me about the duty and dignity of public service, but, beyond this, I would never have known God and my saviour, Jesus Christ, if it was not for them. I can think of no greater gift. Okay, that's the emotional stuff done! You're not used to seeing that side of me. Having said my thankyous and expressed my appreciation, I would now like to reflect on just three things I have learned along the way that may help those dealing with the challenges of the future who continue in this place. The first of these is that, without a strong economy, you cannot achieve your goals as a nation. All good government must start with nurturing a strong, innovative, dynamic, entrepreneurial, market based economy. In the 1980s we threw off the shackles of the federation institutions that Paul Kelly, who is here today, wrote about in The End of Certainty as holding our economy back. This led my generation into 30 years of economic change that, despite some missteps along the way, including a recession we had to have, produced the longest period of continuing economic growth that any nation in the modern world has known. There have been strong contributions made to this achievement by both sides of politics, which I acknowledge—always, though, with Liberal and National support. As we entered the pandemic, I was pleased that, after almost six years of painstaking fiscal effort, we had restored our budget to balance and maintained our AAA credit rating. This was achieved by focusing on economic growth and containing growth in public spending. At the time, our government had the lowest rate of growth in public spending of any Australian government for decades. This would prove vital in the years that followed. Having saved for a rainy day, it was now raining. It was pouring, and we had to respond. Australia would emerge with one of the lowest fatality rates from COVID in the developed world. When compared to the average fatality rates of OECD countries, Australia's response saved more than 30,000 lives. We were described as the gold standard of COVID responses by Bill Gates at the Munich security conference and the second-most COVID prepared nation by the Johns Hopkins Institute. This will always be to Greg Hunt's great credit and that of all those he worked with—his eternal credit. It is also true that, during the pandemic, the rate of death by suicide actually fell and remained down in 2021. This was nothing short of an answer to prayer and the extraordinary efforts of our mental health workers, professionals and services, and I want to acknowledge Professor Pat McGorry and Christine Morgan, who were incredible supports to me during that time. Our plan was not just about saving lives but about saving livelihoods as well. This was achieved with Australia emerging with one of the strongest economies through COVID. Our historic economic response kept 700,000 businesses in business, it kept more than a million Australians in work and, despite these unpredicted outlays, Australia was one of just nine countries to retain a AAA credit rating. Our response was timely, it was targeted and it was temporary. We responsibly retired measures as soon as it was prudent to do so, leading to a historic reduction in the actual budget deficit, with the budget even moving into structural surplus during COVID. As Josh asked me to remind everyone this morning, the unemployment rate had a '3' in front of it when we left. JobKeeper and the myriad of economic supports—designed by Josh and me, with Mathias Cormann and later Simon Birmingham and the whole team at Treasury and the ATO—would have been fanciful had we not entered into this crisis with a tank that was full. We cannot take our economy for granted. Employers and businesses creating jobs is how you run a strong economy and put a budget into structural balance and keep it there. During my time in this place I observed that many of the old partisan differences on economic policy have, regrettably, re-emerged. In 2019 we fought an election on this and we prevailed in our miracle election win. Looking forward, we must be careful not to reinstitutionalise our economy. Such an approach will only negate the capacity we have as a nation to deliver on the essentials that Australians rely on; it will crush entrepreneurial spirit and that wonderful spirit of small business, and leave us vulnerable in the face of new threats to our sovereignty. That brings me to my second point. Those threats are there and they're real. During my time in this place, and especially as Prime Minister, we have seen an end to the post-Cold War period of globalisation and the emergence of a new era of strategic competition, where our global rules based order is being challenged by a new arc of autocracy. This arc of autocracy, which I referred to as Prime Minister, ranges from Pyongyang to Beijing to Tehran and Moscow—a chord of would-be regional hegemons who would prefer power to freedom and care little for the price their own citizens pay to achieve their ends. For this reason our government stood firm against the bullying and coercion of an aggressive Chinese Communist Party government in Beijing who thought we would shrink when pressed. Indeed, we not only stood firm but worked with our allies, our partners and those in our region who wished to protect their own sovereignty to counter this threat to regional peace, prosperity and stability. AUKUS, the Quad, new trading and defence relationships, the first ever comprehensive strategic partnership of any nation with ASEAN and others including PNG, and the Pacific Step-up—all designed to protect our sovereignty and stand up for a global rules based order that favours freedom, especially here in our own region in the Indo-Pacific. In this respect, I pay tribute to the work of Marise Payne and Dan Tehan, as well as Simon Birmingham. I thank the Trump and Biden administrations, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, my good friends Boris Johnson, James Marape, Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo and Robert O'Brien. I pay tribute to late and great Shinzo Abe and his successors, prime ministers Yoshi Suga and Fumio Kishida. The 2022 election may have provided an opportunity for Beijing to step back from their failed attempts at coercion, but we must not be deluded: tactics change but their strategy remains the same. We are not alone in waking up to this threat. Investors are now, rightly, pricing the risk of their investments in an authoritative communist China, while consumer advocates are waking up to human rights abuses and the environmental degradation that infects these supply chains. This requires continued vigilance and the connection between all spheres of policy to create and protect supply chains and integrate and align our strategic and military capabilities so we can protect our sovereignty and counter the threat that is real and building. In Tehran, we find the funders, trainers and apologists for terrorists, seeking to acquire the most deadly defence technology imaginable: nuclear weapons. Their green light for the Hamas terrorist attacks on innocents in Israel, on 7 October, is unforgiveable. In response to such overt attacks there can be no equivocation on where we stand as a representative democracy when another, who has been such a great friend of Australia, is under attack. There also can be no equivocation in calling out the anti-Semitism that has now occurred in this country, to our shame, and in other places across the Western Hemisphere in the wake of 7 October. To that end I am pleased to acknowledge the presence today of the Israeli ambassador, Amir Maimon, in the chamber today. Am Yisrael Chai. In Ukraine, fighting continues to rage two years after Russia's illegal invasion. I'm proud of our swift response to support Ukraine. This must continue and is utilising every resource and capability we can reasonably provide. Ukraine may be a long way from Australia, but the implications of a Russian victory will reverberate just as quickly in our own hemisphere, emboldening again those who seek to challenge our region. My third point is: how do we stand and on what ground? We stand on the very same ground that established our western civilisation and that inspired and enabled the modern, pluralist representative democracy we now enjoy. We stand on the values that build a successful, free society, like individual liberty, the rule of law, equality of opportunity, responsible citizenship, morality and liberty of speech, thought, religion and association. All of these stem from the core principle of respect for individual human dignity. So do representative democracy and even market based capitalism. This is a unique Judaeo-Christian principle. It is about respecting each other's human dignity through our creation by God's hand, in God's image, for God's glory, where each human life is eternally valued, unique, worthy, loved and capable. This is the very basis for our modern understanding of human rights. With the advance of secularism in western society, we may wish to overlook these connections or even denounce them. But the truth remains. Human rights abuses were once called crimes against God, not just against humanity. They are, and they remain so. These truths are not self-evident, as some claim, as history and nature tells a very different story, though divinely inspired. You don't need to share my Christian faith to appreciate the virtue of human rights. I'm not suggesting you do. But, equally, we should be careful about diminishing the influence and the voice of Judaeo-Christian faith in our western society, as doing so risks our society drifting into a valueless void. In that world, there is nothing to stand on, there is nothing to hold on to, and the authoritarians and autocrats win. In the increasing western embrace of secularism, let us be careful not to disconnect ourselves from what I would argue is our greatest gift and the most effective protector of our freedoms—the Judaeo-Christian values upon which our liberty in society was founded. Even if you may not believe, it would be wise to continue to understand, respect and appreciate this important link and foundation. To conclude, you'll be pleased to note a warning about politics, where I've spent most of my professional life, as most of us here have. I know that all political philosophies and ideologies, including my own, are imperfect and regularly confounded by events outside our control. I experienced this firsthand leading Australia through the global pandemic. In my experience, the practice of politics is largely about contesting which approaches are less imperfect than others—in my view, those are the approaches of the Liberal Party—and then trying to humbly appreciate and compensate for their imperfections. It's like Winston Churchill's famous line, and I paraphrase: 'Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others.' While a noble calling, politics can only take you so far, and government can only do so much. You can say the same thing about the market. You won't find all the answers there, either, and you won't find it in unrestricted libertarianism and more-command-and-control communism. In the Liberal Party, we have always believed in how great Australians rather than governments can be, with the true test being how we can enable Australians to realise their own aspirations. I suspect that much of our disillusion with politics and our institutions today is that we have put too much faith in them. At the end of the day, the state and the market are just run by imperfect people like all of us. While politics may be an important and necessary place for service, I would also warn against it being a surrogate for finding identity, ultimate meaning and purpose in life. There are far better options than politics. In The Dignity of Difference, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks wrote that the great tragedies of the 20th century came when politics was turned into a religion and when the nation, in the case of fascism, or the system in communism, was made absolute and turned into a god. I leave this place not as one of those timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat. I leave having given all in that arena, and there are plenty of scars to show for it. While I left nothing of my contributions on that field, I do leave behind in that arena, where it will always remain, any bitterness, disappointments or offences that have occurred along the way. I leave this place appreciative and thankful, unburdened by offences and released of any of the bitterness that can so often haunt post-political lives. This is due to my faith in Jesus Christ, which gives me the faith to both forgive and be honest about my own failings and shortcomings. During my time as Prime Minister, the power and necessity of forgiveness was demonstrated to me most profoundly by the Abdallah and Sakr families, whose children were taken from them, and they found the strength in their faith to forgive. For those who perhaps may feel a bit uncomfortable with my Christian references and scripture references here or at other times, I can't apologise for that. It says in Romans 1:16: 'For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes.' It says in 2 Timothy 1:17: 'I am not ashamed for I know what I believe and in whom and I am convinced that He is able to protect what I have entrusted to Him until that day.' In that vein, let me quote one last scripture in this place as an encouragement to all who continue to serve. 2 Thessalonians 2:16 says: 'Now may our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God and our father, who has loved and given us eternal comfort and good hope by grace, comfort and strengthen your hearts in every good work and deed.' Thank you all those who join me here today or are listening elsewhere for your kind attention. As always, up, up Cronulla!
Thomas, Mr Adam | Statements on Indulgence | House debates
I thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity to add my words to his, and I commend him for bringing this to the attention of the House. Public servants serve in many ways to serve our country,...
I thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity to add my words to his, and I commend him for bringing this to the attention of the House. Public servants serve in many ways to serve our country, and Adam Thomas certainly is one of those. He has a very special responsibility, as the Prime Minister has set out. As a fine chef, he has cooked for the heads of state, prime ministers and secretaries of state that I was also able to host there at Kirribilli. The one thing Jenny and I are truly grateful to Adam for is that he understood that this was an important public residence, that it was an important part of the public estate and that it had many official purposes, but that it was also a home. Particularly, for Jenny and me and, of course, for Mr and Mrs Howard and Mr and Mrs Abbott, it was where we lived as families. Particularly for my young children at the time, who entered Kirribilli House as primary schoolgirls and left as teenagers, Adam and the staff at Kirribilli always made them feel very safe and very welcome in that place which became our home for that period of time. To Adam, his wife, Kee-o, and his two now adult sons, we are very grateful for the sacrifices they made for us. They saw that very much as part of their service. I'm not surprised Adam wouldn't want to come and have all the fuss, but it is important that his service to our country is recognised. Given I'm saying thank you to Adam, it would be wrong of me not to take the opportunity at the same time to also thank Trina Barry, who worked at the Lodge for many years and, unfortunately, wasn't able to continue on in that role after the last election. She served governors-general and prime ministers from both sides of the House. She and Adam, together, made an outstanding team, and I know Adam would join me in praising Trina's service as well. Thank you, Prime Minister, for bringing this to the attention of the House. The only thing I think Adam and I ever disagreed on was the football teams we followed. I thank him for the many cooking tips he gave me with my curries and for indulging me in regard to the mess that I often made in that kitchen. Thank you, Adam. God bless you and your family.
After a week that saw the greatest loss of Jewish lives since the Holocaust, Jews gathered at the Central Synagogue in Bondi Junction for Shabbat services, just as Jews have gathered for Shabbat...
After a week that saw the greatest loss of Jewish lives since the Holocaust, Jews gathered at the Central Synagogue in Bondi Junction for Shabbat services, just as Jews have gathered for Shabbat services for centuries. On this particular evening, though, there was a special poignancy to their gathering, as they came together to console, support and encourage others. As the women lit their candles in hope and we gathered for the Shabbat service, which Jenny and I were pleased to attend along with the current member for Wentworth and the former member for Wentworth Dave Sharma, Rabbi Levi said, 'Am Yisrael Chai.' The people of Israel live on. It was a statement of resilience. It was a statement of faith. It was a statement of hope. If there's one thing I have learnt in my long association with the Jewish community, it is that they are a people of endurance, resilience and hope, even in the most awful circumstances, which they have experienced this past week. I'm pleased to stand in support of this bipartisan motion and to stand here in support of the people of Israel and the state of Israel. I stand here and condemn the barbaric, violent and unprovoked terrorist attack by Hamas on the people of Israel on 7 October and the murder, the beheading, the rape and the hostage-taking of innocent civilians, including babies, children, women and the elderly. We express our deepest sympathy and deep condolences to members of this place, to people all around our country, to the state of Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu and all of his people and to the Jewish community here in Australia through Ambassador Amir Maimon, who I spoke to, as we denounce these terrible acts. These terrorist acts have been rightly identified as terrorist acts. To speak of this as a war is to somehow risk legitimising the other combatant for which there can be no legitimacy whatsoever. They are terrorists. As Prime Minister I was pleased that we listed in full Hamas as a terrorist organisation as well as Hezbollah and many others, because that is indeed what they are. As we gather in this place and rightly denounce and condemn these acts, I hope it will not fade from our memory quickly or ever, because that is too often the case. I remember, as the member for Berowra will remember, back in December 2018, the UN General Assembly considered a resolution condemning Hamas for repeatedly firing rockets into Israel and for inciting violence, thereby putting civilians at risk, and for its use of resources in Gaza to construct military infrastructure, including tunnels to infiltrate Israel and equipment to launch rockets into civilian areas. It specified that further engagement by the UN Secretary-General and the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, in efforts to de-escalate the situation in Gaza, was also needed. I instructed that we would support that motion in condemning Hamas. A procedural vote was held before that main vote on the resolution, calling for the main resolution to be decided on a two-thirds majority. It was passed in that chamber, narrowing the odds of the resolution passing successfully. Although 87 voted in favour, including Australia, a majority either voted against or abstained, meaning that the resolution failed under the ruling. Before the vote, the US permanent representative to the UN said that, despite more than 500 General Assembly resolutions condemning Israel at the United Nations, not one had condemned Hamas—not one. As we stand in this place, appalled, aggrieved and with our hearts breaking, we should not be surprised by this barbarous violence from such a group. They should never have been given the leave pass of legitimacy that they experienced for so long from the international community. They should have always been condemned, and may they forever be condemned. So we stand here and say we will support the State of Israel's right to self-defence—as we should in this motion—in taking action to respond to these terror acts, but let us know that this should and must include all efforts to eradicate Hamas from Gaza and dismantling the capability of Hamas to conduct terrorist attacks on the people and State of Israel in the future. In the weeks and the months ahead, let our resolve not diminish. Let our eyes not turn away from what we say today, as we continue to support the State of Israel's legitimate right to defend itself and remove that ever-present threat that has stood there each and every day, threatening their citizens as they go about their peaceful lives. I join the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in saying that we as Australia should call on the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease its funding, training and arming of terrorist organisations that include Hamas. We cannot look away from the support that Hamas has received from Iran. It is an abomination. They are the funders of this terrible violence. If they approved it, we will not know. Hamas, of its own accord, is capable of engaging in such violent barbarism all of its own making, but its ability to do so could not have occurred without the training, funding and assistance provided by Iran. As we say in the motion, we must also support the work of humanitarian assistance and the humanitarian corridors to call for the immediate and unconditional release of the hostages, to enable safe passage and to prevent innocent civilians being further caught in what will be an ensuing conflict, which I fear will be quite awful. I particularly commend the consular work being undertaken by DFAT officials and the bravery they've shown on so many occasions. I recall the bravery they showed as they went into Wuhan at the outset of the COVID crisis, and here they are again, assisting Australians. I thank Qantas for their work, once again, coming to Australians' aid. We should also be looking ahead and working to support other international organisations in dialogue so that, once order is restored to Gaza, there be the transfer of administrative authority over the Gaza Strip to a credible and competent Palestinian led authority. We must acknowledge and continue to encourage and support the progress being made towards peace in the Middle East through the establishment of the Abraham Accords, whose work should not be frustrated or delayed by these actions. Of course, we reaffirm our support for the establishment of a viable and sustainable two-state solution in Israel and the Palestinian territories, behind recognised international borders. On this day, as we stand in this place, let us be clear. Let us say, with Rabbi Levi and all the people of the Jewish community here in Australia and around the world, 'Am Yisrael chai.'
Members of Parliament: Staff | Statements on Indulgence | House debates
I take statements made to this House extremely seriously—especially by ministers and, indeed, Prime Ministers—and am fully aware of the responsibility of members in this regard. I...
I take statements made to this House extremely seriously—especially by ministers and, indeed, Prime Ministers—and am fully aware of the responsibility of members in this regard. I have always shown great care to ensure that any statements I have made to this House have been accurate to the best of my knowledge and recollection at the time, and where I have been in error or where errors are brought to my attention I have always taken the opportunity to enter this House at the first opportunity to correct the record. This is our obligation as members. Last Saturday, the Weekend Australian reported comments by Ms Brown, a former member of my staff as Prime Minister, regarding the accuracy of an answer to a question I gave as Prime Minister on Thursday 18 February 2021, more than two years ago. Following the publication of the article in the Weekend Australian on Saturday, I took the opportunity to review and inform myself once again of the events of that week, as the Weekend Australian article was the first occasion I had been made aware that Ms Brown had a different account of the events that I referred to in my response to a question in the House on Thursday 18 February 2021. I am therefore now pleased to take this first opportunity to address and clarify these matters here to this House. I became aware of the incident involving Ms Higgins on Monday 15 February 2021. Over the course of that week I received numerous briefings and participated in numerous meetings on what was known about those events to assist me to address the issues appropriately in this House. These briefings included information drawn from discussions held between members of my senior staff and Ms Brown. There were also many corridor conversations within my office—as opposed to the corridors of this place more broadly—that occurred that week, and I note that Ms Brown's office was located directly outside my own. It was an extremely busy week, and there were many other issues I was addressing as Prime Minister at the time, most significantly COVID-19 and the advancement of AUKUS. Over the course of that week I responded to, I believe, 14 questions from the then Leader of the Opposition and the member for Sydney on the Higgins matter. On the Thursday, just before 3 pm, I responded to a further question addressing these matters on that day. The question was from the then Leader of the Opposition and asked whether I'd raised a statement with the staff member in my office—that is, Ms Brown—that Ms Higgins had alleged in a statement that Ms Brown had 'continually made her feel as if her ongoing employment would be jeopardised if she proceeded any further with the matter. In my response I confirmed that I had raised the matter with the member of my staff, and that was my recollection at the time. I preceded this by noting that 'there had been many conversations over the course of that week in relation to these issues'. In my response, I noted: … the Australian Human Rights Commission says if an employer suspects that a criminal incident has occurred the individual should be advised to report the matter to the police, and that is indeed what the minister— that is, Senator Reynolds— did at the time— obviously, supported by her office. I said: The minister arranged for Brittany to have that meeting with the AFP, and that occurred on 1 April. I responded: Everyone here— and by implication that included Ms Brown— tried to do the right thing. They took advice and followed the advice, and they sought to provide that support. Last Saturday, I had the opportunity to discuss these matters directly with Ms Brown regarding her recollection of these events, for the first time, and I appreciate the opportunity to have had this discussion with Ms Brown. While my recollection differed from that of Ms Brown, given that there have now been more than two years that have passed and given the considerable activity of that week and the presence of Ms Brown's contemporaneous note, while I believed my response to be accurate at the time, I cannot, obviously, fully discount that her recollection of those events now is the more accurate. However, I reject absolutely any suggestion of deliberate intent in any such possible inaccuracy in my response, and I am pleased to have taken the first opportunity available to me to clarify these matters to the House. The lack of any such deliberate intent is borne out by the fact that, regardless of whether an exchange between me and Ms Brown had occurred prior to my providing my response in the House, my answer regarding Ms Brown's conduct in relation to Ms Higgins and dealing with the allegation made in relation to Ms Brown's conduct had been informed by detailed discussions with Ms Brown and members of my office who were advising me on those matters. It was and remains my strong view that Ms Brown did all she could to provide support to Ms Higgins at that time and that, most importantly, Senator Reynolds's office had sought to ensure these issues were dealt with through the justice system in supporting references to be made to the police while at the same time respecting Ms Higgins's wishes for confidentiality and thereby supporting her agency. Allegations of sexual violence against women should be addressed in our justice system. They should not be cynically prosecuted in the public square for politics, as has sadly and increasingly been revealed in relation to these issues.
Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) 2023; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
Later this year, we will be asked to vote in a referendum to make a significant, binding and permanent change to our Constitution. Everyone voting has the same say. No-one's view is more...
Later this year, we will be asked to vote in a referendum to make a significant, binding and permanent change to our Constitution. Everyone voting has the same say. No-one's view is more important than anyone else's. Celebrities and politicians just get one vote, like everybody else. It is important that our discussions are conducted in good faith and with mutual respect. This referendum is not a decision for companies or unions or sporting codes or any other group. These groups have no standing under our Constitution, but, as Australians, you do. Such groups can represent whatever views they like. They're entitled to do that. It's a free country, and we celebrate that. However, while keenly interested in the NRL's opinion on hip-drop tackles and the six-again rule, I don't think I'll be referring to them for constitutional advice in making my decisions on this matter. So I offer these few thoughts and observations as one Australian to another—one who has the privilege to make such contributions as a member of this place—recognising that my views may not fully accord with others in this place or elsewhere, but to make clear my views and the reasons for them, especially to my constituents of Cook. The government is seeking to establish a new, permanent constitutional body called the Voice, through which exclusive consultation rights will be granted to Indigenous Australians, not afforded to any other group of Australians. While not sharing the same powers, the new body will be established alongside other significant constitutional bodies—namely, our parliament, our executive government and our courts. Once established, the Voice cannot be removed by the parliament, as proved necessary when the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission became dysfunctional and was rightly and successfully abolished by this parliament. As a constitutional body, the Voice will also have constitutional powers that have not been tested before and can never be constrained. This is a big deal. It constitutes a major change to our Constitution, with far-reaching implications, many of which are not yet known and, importantly, will not be known at the time Australians are asked to vote. The government's proposal for a constitutional Voice is fundamentally different to the many successful remedial initiatives in the past that have sought to affirm recognition, rightly, of Indigenous Australians and address the many injustices and inequalities faced by Indigenous Australians. In 1967, the Holt Liberal government initiated an important and successful referendum to change our Constitution to honour the principles of Indigenous recognition and national unity. The Holt referendum gave long-overdue recognition to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as citizens of our nation and ensured they were counted in our official census. Up until this time, they had been treated as lesser Australians under the Constitution. This was wrong, and it needed to be corrected. The successful referendum remediated a deficiency in our Constitution that was causing unequal treatment of fellow Australians. It was an important and necessary change that enjoyed widespread community and bipartisan support. The 1967 Holt Liberal Government referendum brought Australians together. In 1992, the High Court handed down its famous Mabo decision on native title. This corrected the long-held historical application in Australia of the principle of terra nullius, which had denied native title rights to Indigenous Australians. In 1993, the Keating Labor government passed the Native Title Act to create a framework for the management of native title. This act was then amended by the Howard Liberal government in 1998 to address issues arising from the Wik decision of the High Court on these matters. These actions of the High Court and the parliament were remedial. They addressed defects in our understanding and the application of our laws and rectified the denial of rights to Indigenous people. It demonstrated the effectiveness of our existing Constitution at work. In 2008, the Rudd Labor government initiated the national apology to Indigenous Australians and established the Closing the Gap program. I was pleased to stand in support of the apology in our national parliament as one of my very first acts as the member for Cook in this place. The apology recognised the injustices experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and subsequently committed tens of billions of dollars in programs, on a bipartisan basis, to address Indigenous disadvantage. I was pleased to serve in and, as Prime Minister, lead a government that honoured and built upon this work. In March of 2020, as Prime Minister, I entered into the first ever Partnership Agreement on Closing the Gap. For the first time, all Australian governments, federal, state and local, entered into a genuine partnership with the Coalition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peak Organisations to work together to deliver essential services to Indigenous Australians on the ground to close the gap, with all of us taking responsibility. This was backed up by our implementation plan, which committed an additional $1 billion for specific new measures in Indigenous health, education, justice and employment. We also took practical action on reconciliation, committing $316.5 million to build the new Ngurra Cultural Precinct in the Parliamentary Triangle here in Canberra, which will include a national resting place to care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ancestral remains. This will rectify a longstanding omission and represent an important addition and contribution to the physical and cultural institutions of our national capital. We also delivered $378.6 million for the Territories Stolen Generations Redress Scheme for survivors in the Northern Territory and the ACT, including the Jervis Bay territory. We also progressed our plans for a legislated voice to parliament, commissioning Professors Marcia Langton and Tom Calma to prepare a detailed report on the establishment of local, state and national voices. In January 2021 as Prime Minister I initiated a simple but important change to our national anthem that recognised an important truth about our country. No longer would we sing about being young and free. Rather, as Australians we would now sing that we are one and free. This meant we understood and celebrated Australia as an ancient land that was home to the oldest living culture on our planet. Importantly, it also acknowledged that as Australians we were one and all equal under our Constitution. All of these remedial actions were designed to address Indigenous disadvantage and amplify the voice of Indigenous Australians within our democracy while observing the important constitutional principle that no one group should ever have any greater rights than any other in our country. The government's proposed changes to our Constitution will change this, permanently creating different rights for one group of Australians over others based solely on race. That is the opposite of what has previously occurred, especially in relation to the 1967 referendum where our Constitution was changed to give Indigenous Australians the same rights as all other Australians. What is proposed here is not the same thing. The impact of the Voice on the operations of executive government and the parliament are also not known, presenting significant and unknown risks that cannot be easily remedied, if at all. It is ill-defined, creating significant constitutional risk. Ultimately the High Court will be left to decipher the unknown and decide what this all means, long after Australians have cast their vote with no further say. This will inevitably lead to confusion and uncertainty over everything from our national defence to the operations of Centrelink, which all fall within the ambit of the Voice. There are no limits. Once our Constitution is permanently changed, the scope and role of the Voice will appropriately be open to interpretation by the High Court, who will then also be able to overrule both our elected parliament and our elected executive government in the future in relation to the role and conduct of the Voice. The Leader of the Opposition has noted that the government has refused to define these issues or follow the past practice of convening a constitutional convention to ensure that they are better understood and that any unintentional consequences can be remedied before Australians are asked to vote. The government also refuses to consider any changes to its proposal that would genuinely minimise these risks. This not only reflects a failure of process but imposes the government model on the Australian people rather than listening, responding and uniting all Australians. Finally, there are two additional important points to note about the government's proposal. Firstly, it is not necessary to enshrine the Voice in the Constitution to deliver constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians that enjoys broad support. It is wrong to conflate the issues of the Voice with constitutional recognition and treat them as inseparable. They are entirely separable. Furthermore, seeking to achieve constitutional recognition by the government's method creates numerous and needless risks. Constitutional recognition enjoys bipartisan support and can be achieved through minor amendments to our Constitution that do not compromise the efficient conduct of government and the parliament or needlessly divide Australians. As Prime Minister I was supportive of constitutional recognition and wished to achieve this in a way that would bring Australians together. The Labor Party made it clear from the outset that it was the Voice or nothing, leaving no room for compromise. I chose not to divide the country over the issue, especially as it would have had no material impact on the welfare of Indigenous peoples, which was my principal concern and that of all Australians. Secondly, there is no impediment to establishing a body such as the Voice under national legislation through our parliament. We do not need to change the Constitution to achieve this and therefore can avoid realising the risks that come with such a significant and permanent change to our Constitution. Such a process would enable any such body to be properly defined and road-tested through the parliament. This was my government's policy. Our priority was to first see such bodies created at a local and regional level, to help provide direct input from local Indigenous communities into local and regional programs to close the gap and improve the lives of Indigenous people on the ground, where it mattered most. Once established, such local and regional bodies would also make the creation of a nationally legislated voice more possible and would be more truly representative of local Indigenous communities. Ours was not a top-down approach from Canberra. This referendum is not a vote about whether Australians wish to support and do everything they can to recognise and improve the lives of Indigenous Australians. We all agree on this, and we can all say yes to this, but that is not the question the government is proposing. It is true that governments of all political persuasions have failed Indigenous Australians over multiple generations. However, it is also true that much progress has been made based on a shared and deep commitment that transcends political boundaries. In my time in this parliament, there have been strong, positive bipartisan steps taken to try and solve extremely complex and often intractable problems. Indigenous Australians need the programs we invest in to be more effective, and we all remain committed to this goal. Permanently changing the Constitution in the way the government proposes will, sadly, not change the desperate circumstances being experienced in so many Indigenous communities across Australia. I understand that that is the hope of the proposal, and hope is a good thing, but hope disappointed will be crushing to the soul, and such disappointment can be reasonably foreseen upon proceeding with the government's proposal. In my experience, we will make better progress on improving the lives of Indigenous Australians by focusing on what we can agree to get done on the ground, rather than gambling with our Constitution. For these reasons, I consider that the government's proposal to permanently change the Constitution, while positively motivated, is poorly constructed. It presents serious and unnecessary risks both known and unknown to the operations of the executive government and our parliament, upon which all Australians depend. Such deficiencies cannot be overcome or mitigated by the good intentions and sentiment of their creation. It also fundamentally breaks one of our nation's most important principles: that as Australians we are all equal and none of us are any more Australian than any other. As Australians, we are one and free. I believe we need to keep it that way and therefore cannot support the government's proposal at this referendum. That said, I remain committed to the constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians and to all Australians being treated equally under our Constitution, and I look forward to the day when such a proposal is brought forward in a way that unites rather than divides our country. That proposal will have my enthusiastic support.
Member for Cook; Censure | Motions | House debates
I thank the Australian people for the privilege to serve as their Prime Minister. I thank the people of Cook for the privilege they have given me to serve in this House as their member. I thank...
I thank the Australian people for the privilege to serve as their Prime Minister. I thank the people of Cook for the privilege they have given me to serve in this House as their member. I thank my colleagues, here in this place and in previous parliaments, who have asked me in the past to lead and for the faith they have placed in me. I am proud of my achievements in this place and I am proud of my government. I am proud that at a time of extreme trial my government stood up and faced the abyss of uncertainty that our country looked into and the coercion of a regional bully and saw Australia through the storm. Australia emerged stronger under my government. I have no intention now, Mr Speaker, of submitting to the political intimidation of this government using its numbers in this place to impose its retribution on a political opponent. In addressing the matters that are the subject of the motion, I repeat that I have welcomed and supported the recommendations of the Bell inquiry, and I note the following facts for the House. The authorities to administer departments were established as a dormant redundancy only to be activated in extraordinary circumstances, evidenced by the fact that no powers were exercised under these authorities, except in the case of the PEP-11 decision, as such circumstances were not realised and, therefore, none of these authorities were misused. The Solicitor-General found that the authorities established to administer departments in this way were valid and were not unlawful. Other than in the case of the PEP-11 decision, ministers exercised their portfolio authorities fully, without intervention or the threat of intervention, and departments supported their ministers in that capacity without uncertainty regarding their ministerial authorities. As Prime Minister I did not act as minister or engage in any co-minister arrangements, as suggested, including requiring the receipt of any parallel briefing or co-authorising arrangements, except in the very specific case of the PEP-11 decision and not otherwise for that department. On the PEP-11 matter, this was done lawfully from first principles and I consider my decision was the correct one. My intent to exercise these powers was also advised to the minister in advance of exercising those powers. The ministry list tabled in parliament referenced, as it does, that ministers may be sworn to administer additional departments. The requirements requiring notice purported to constitute convention in the motion were not identified or recognised by officials advising on these matters from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and cannot therefore be clearly regarded as established convention. The Solicitor-General found there is no consistent practice for a publication in the Gazette of appointments to administer particular departments of state. The Bell inquiry noted there was a different understanding of the process of publication between myself and the department and that no instruction was given by me as Prime Minister or my office not to publish those arrangements in the Gazette. In relation to communication with my ministerial colleagues on these matters I note that I've addressed these issues privately with my colleagues and publicly in my statement of 16 August 2022. I also note, as is particularly relevant to this House and this motion, that I was present each and every day at that dispatch box to answer any and all questions in this House regularly directed to me as Prime Minister on all matters involving all portfolios that were the subject of the Bell inquiry and, indeed, all other portfolios. The suggestion that, as Prime Minister, I was not available to do so in this House or that the opposition failed to ask such questions in those portfolios is absurd and completely false. I also note that, in my earlier portfolio responsibilities where I was sworn to hold the office of Treasurer, Minister for Social Services and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, my appointments as minister of state specifically made reference in the documents authorised by the Governor-General that I was sworn to hold the office as minister in each of these portfolios. In my appointment as a minister of state to administer the departments that were the subject of the Bell inquiry this was not the case. The documentation authorised by the Governor-General carefully does not include any reference to being sworn to hold the office of minister for any of the portfolios that were the subject of the Bell inquiry, simply to administer the department. This can be seen in appendix A, at pages 107 to 110 of the Bell inquiry report. This is a very important distinction. Just because a minister is sworn to administer a department does not mean they hold the office of minister in that portfolio. I should say, the contention that the public would also be popularly under the impression that the Prime Minister did not have authority over government departments is extremely unlikely. Furthermore, the proposition that the public would not hold the Prime Minister accountable for the actions of the government is also not credible and counter to the argument that was put forward by the opposition when I was Prime Minister each and every day that I sat in this House. Returning to the issue of being sworn, I was not sworn to hold the office of any of those ministerial portfolios, and, as a result, any contention that I served as minister of those portfolios in that office is false. On the substantive matters—I return to those now—in each of the decisions taken during my time as Prime Minister to administer departments I note again that our nation faced the greatest challenges we had experienced since the Second World War: a drought, natural disasters, a global pandemic, the global and domestic recession, the pandemic cause, and a rising and coercive China seeking to coerce Australia into submission. These were extremely challenging times. To put the economic challenge in context, according to the IMF, during the first year of the pandemic the global economy shrank by 3.1 per cent. This is more than 30 times the magnitude of the economic decline during the global financial crisis of 2009. That was a crisis. During this period, we were fighting for our very survival from a public health, economic and national security perspective. As Prime Minister I sought to exercise my responsibilities during this extremely difficult period in a manner that would best advance and protect Australia's national interests and the welfare of the Australian people. That is what I had pledged to do, and I am pleased that, through these efforts and the efforts of so many others I worked with closely, Australia was able to emerge from this period of significant crisis in a safer and more prosperous position than almost any other country in the world. That was the objective of my government and, together with my colleagues here and those who formerly sat with us, that was achieved. In February this year Bill Gates was asked at the Munich Security Conference whether it was possible to prevent the next pandemic. He answered by citing Australia's response to the pandemic, referring to it as 'the gold standard', and that standard was one we met. He said, 'If every country did what Australia did then we wouldn't be calling it a pandemic.' That is something any government could be proud of. The New York Times calculated in May this year that, if the United States had the same death rate as Australia, about 900,000 lives would have been saved. Johns Hopkins University ranked Australia second in the world in pandemic preparedness. Bloomberg ranked Australia the world's fifth most COVID-resilient nation. Shortly after I left office after the last election, Australia had the third-lowest mortality rate in the OECD from COVID at 401 deaths per million population. This can be compared with Canada at 1,106 per million, the United Kingdom at 2,688 per million and the United States at over 3,000 per million. During the pandemic it was estimated that, when compared to the average fatality rates of OECD countries, Australia's response saved more than 30,000 lives. More than 95 per cent of Australia's adult population had been administered two vaccine doses and we had commenced fourth doses. Unlike in so many other countries—advanced, developed countries—our hospital system had not been overrun by the pandemic. And since December 2019, when the pandemic first struck, Australia's economy had grown by 4½ per cent. This compares to growth of 3.9 per cent in Korea, 2.7 per cent in the US, less than one per cent in the UK, Canada, and France, and the Japanese and German economies remained in negative territory. Australia's success was also achieved by limiting the scale of the economic decline during COVID. In Australia the economic decline caused by COVID was 2.2 per cent. This compares to 3.4 per cent in the US, 4½ per cent in Japan, 4.6 per cent in Germany, eight per cent in France and 9.3 per cent in the United Kingdom. At the same time, Australia's unemployment rate fell to below four per cent, the lowest in almost half a century, with almost 600,000 more jobs than we had before the pandemic began. During this time the government made unprecedented investments in our health and economic response. JobKeeper kept 700,000 businesses in business. It kept more than one million Australians in work. And despite these unpredicted outlays, Australia, through the pandemic and the crisis, was one of only nine countries in the world to retain our AAA credit rating. Our response was timely, it was targeted, and it was temporary. We responsibly retired measures as soon as it was prudent. This led to an historic reduction in the budget deficit in our final year of more than $100 billion. During this time, I and the government made many decisions, from closing our international borders to making our own vaccines and directly manufacturing PPE. We tried many things. We were dealing with extreme uncertainty and unpredictability. The Australian people were rightly fearful for their own health and economic security. The mindset at this time was to seek to prepare as best as possible for as many contingencies as possible. This was not always successful, as was the experience of all countries around the world at the time. No leader and no nation had a perfect record, but Australia can be proud that we had one of the very best. At the same time, significant powers were activated by the government, including under the Biosecurity Act and in financial delegations to the Minister for Finance, that were beyond the oversight of cabinet. I elected to put in place a redundancy to those powers and an oversight on those powers in the departments of Health and Finance. I do not resile from these decisions and believe them entirely necessary, mirroring many arrangements similarly being implemented in the private sector at the time. My omission was not having personally informed the Minister for Finance, who I believed had been informed through my office. I was mistaken about that, which was only brought to my attention when I made these matters public. I've addressed this issue directly with the then Minister for Finance. Had I been asked about these matters at the time at the numerous press conferences I held, I would've responded truthfully about the arrangements I had put in place. The recommendations of the Bell inquiry will appropriately remedy this deficiency in the future, and I support them. The decision to take on authority to administer the departments of Treasury and Home Affairs in 2021 as a dormant redundancy for decisions that were not subject to cabinet oversight was to be able to take swift action, if necessary, in the national interest at a time when Australians' interests were under constant threat. I now consider that these decisions, in hindsight, were unnecessary and that insufficient consideration was given to these decisions at the time, including nondisclosure. I therefore accept the recommendations put forward by the Bell inquiry as an appropriate remedy to these shortcomings. I note again that these authorities were never exercised and, as a result, had no impact on the functions or actions of the government. It is strange to describe such actions as a power grab, as they were never exercised or even used to exercise influence over the relevant ministers. They were simply a dormant redundancy. In relation to the decision to take authority to administer the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources for the purpose of being able to consider PEP 11, I do not resile from that action. The authority was lawfully sought and exercised on a specific matter solely. I considered it unnecessary to dismiss the minister to deal with this matter, as he was doing a fine job, and unlawful to inappropriately pressure him in relation to this decision. I therefore lawfully took the decision from first principles in his place. I believe the decision I made on PEP 11 was the correct one. I note the criticisms made of my decisions to be authorised to administer a series of departments have been made from the safety and relative calm of hindsight. I also note that as Prime Minister my awareness of issues regarding national security at this time and the national interest was broader than known to individual ministers and any third party. This limits the ability for third parties to draw definitive conclusions on such matters and sit in judgement. During the course of my prime ministership I made many decisions. These decisions were taken during an extremely challenging period where there was a need for considerable urgency and there was great stress on the system and individuals. None of us can claim to be infallible in such circumstances, and I do not. There are always lessons to be learned from such times and events. I acknowledge that the nondisclosure of arrangements has caused unintentional offence and extend an apology to those who were offended, but I do not apologise for taking action, especially prudent redundancy action, in a national crisis in order to save lives and to save livelihoods. I also agree with and thank the many who have expressed their support that any perceived deficiencies in the handling of these matters must be reasonably and fairly weighed against the overarching success of the numerous other decisions taken and efforts made under extreme pressure to save lives and livelihoods. This motion fails to do this and, sadly, therefore betrays its true motive that is entirely partisan. The government's response to censure and prosecute this motion is to engage in the politics of retribution and nothing less. These are the behaviours of an opposition, not a government who understands that grace in victory is a virtue. I recommend that their response as a government should simply be to implement the recommendations of the Bell inquiry, which I support, and focus their attention on their current and urgent responsibilities to address the many challenges Australians are now facing on their watch, especially the cost of living. How we respond to these events is up to each and every one of us. For mine, I will take the instruction of my faith and turn the other cheek. Since the election, I have refrained from public comment, despite provocation, other than on local issues and to note the actions and achievements of my government. I accepted the result—as I should, willingly and happily—of the last election and wished the new government every success, and I have sought to move on with my life with my family and to continue to serve the people of my local electorate in Cook. I voluntarily stepped down from the leadership of my party and gave my full support to the new leadership, whom I commend. I thank them for their support, especially the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, and I thank all of my colleagues, both former and current, both now and over a long period of time, for the same. In that, I particularly acknowledge the former Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, the former Minister for Health and Aged Care, Greg Hunt, and the member for Riverina, who together, the four of us, dealt with so much of that crisis each and every day together. I have seen bitterness destroy people who have come to this place, and it continues to gnaw away at them each and every day of their lives for even decades after they leave this place. I am not one of those, nor will I ever be. I am proud of the many achievements that I have been able to accomplish in this place, especially as Prime Minister, and I am very grateful for the opportunities and to all of those I worked with to achieve them. We saw Australia through one of our most difficult times. We stood up to a bullying Chinese regime which sought to coerce and impose itself on our democracy through threats, sanctions and intimidation. I was pleased to establish the AUKUS agreement and tighten our partnerships with all our key partners, especially the United States, Japan, India, the United Kingdom, across our region in ASEAN—we were the first country to establish a comprehensive strategic partnership with ASEAN—and, of course, our dear Pacific family. I was pleased to have strengthened our economy through the pandemic and to have seen electricity prices fall by 10 per cent on my watch as PM; for individual and small business taxes to be cut and more than 300,000 Australians directly assisted into homeownership. And, by strengthening our economy, I was pleased we were able to guarantee the essential services that Australians relied on during times of great uncertainty, with record Medicare bulk-billing rates, PBS listings at record levels and record funds for aged care, disability care and mental health. For those who now wish to add their judgement today on my actions, in supporting this censure motion, I simply suggest that they stop and consider the following: Have you ever had to deal with a crisis where the outlook was completely unknown? In such circumstances, were you able to get all the decisions perfectly right? Where you may have made errors, were you fortunate enough for them to have had no material impact on the result, and for the result itself to prove to be world-leading? Once you have considered your own experience, or perhaps when you have had more in government, then you may wish to cast the first stone in this place. Perhaps the response to these difficult times and events is not to go down that path but down the path of thankfulness that Australia's performance through the pandemic was one of the strongest in the developed world; to appreciate in humility, not in retribution, that no country and no leader got all the decisions right, and gracefully take up the lessons that have been learned and equip us to do even better in the future. It is an honour to serve in this House, and I have done that for these past 15 years. I am grateful again to the people of Cook for their strong support during this time, including most recently. I thank them for their encouragement, their many messages of support, as I and my family have returned to our dear home in the shire. I also thank my local Liberal Party members for their constant support, my local church community at Horizon Church for their prayers, and people of faith from all around the country who have extended the same. I have been humbled by your messages of support and encouragement. I also thank again my colleagues here in this place, and formerly, for their support. It is indeed an honour to serve alongside you. I especially thank my wife, Jen, our daughters, Abbey and Lily, and my family and friends for their love and support, as well as my former staff for their great loyalty. You must always be proud of what you accomplished during our time working together. I conclude by thanking the Australian people for the privilege of being able to serve my country in so many roles, but especially as Prime Minister. I gave it everything I had. I did it to the best of my ability and in the best of faith each and every day I had the privilege to serve the Australian people.
Address | Death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth Ii and Accession of His Majesty King Charles Iii | House debates
This has been a time of mourning across our country, with waves of sorrow and grief from coast to coast. But it has also been a time of rich and fond remembrance. It has been a time of...
This has been a time of mourning across our country, with waves of sorrow and grief from coast to coast. But it has also been a time of rich and fond remembrance. It has been a time of thanksgiving and gratitude for a remarkable life of service in Her Majesty. I acknowledge the many fine contributions of those in this House that have preceded mine and will follow mine. With duty, dignity, dedication, service, strength, courage, compassion, grace, humility and love, Her Majesty was one who served, when so many others might have sought to be served in such a role. She was a rock. She was a constant for the Commonwealth as Queen of Australia. But I think, more than that, she was a rock and a constant in so many people's lives. She was something that didn't change in a world that changed every minute of every day. From that, people found the strength and the fortitude to carry on in the worst of times and to celebrate in the best. What, do we ask, enables someone, in Her Majesty, to live such a life? What sustained her in this service and sacrifice? This is what I want to reflect on today. Many have told stories, and I welcome those; I could tell them also. But what I want to focus on is what I believe sustained Her Majesty in all of this. She answered the question herself in her many Christmas messages, which I've taken the time to go back over and read. By her own confession, it was her deep and abiding faith in Jesus Christ that she so often referenced in those messages. Most recently, in 2014 she said: For me, the life of Jesus Christ … is an inspiration and an anchor in my own life. In 2002—and the Leader of the Opposition made reference to this—in what was one of her most difficult years, having lost her mother and her sister, she must have felt, apart from having Philip with her, so alone. She said this in her Christmas message: I know just how much I rely on my own faith to guide me through the good times and the bad … and put my trust in God. It says in 2 Samuel what I think is the best description of Her Majesty's reign: … who rules righteously, who rules in the fear of God, is like the light of the morning as the sun rises. A morning without clouds, when the fresh grass springs out of the earth from sunshine after rain. That was a testimony to Her Majesty's reign. So, as a grateful nation, we do give thanks, and so many from all of our constituencies right across the country have done that, as have mine in the electorate of Cook in the Sutherland shire and St George area. Margaret Crowley says, 'Thank you. Thank you for being an irreplaceable constant in our lives.' Janice Dent from Gymea says, 'The world is a better place because of her reign.' Jillian Won from Carss Park says, 'The world has lost a wonderful woman, and I feel I've lost a family member. Rest in peace, Ma'am. You have earned it.' Margaret Tattersall of Sylvania said this: 'Forever loved but never forgotten.' Angela Holmes, a registered nurse—she signs herself off as from Burraneer—says: 'Thank you, Ma'am, from the bottom of our hearts.' But it is this one that I really appreciate, and it's from Susan Hitchen in Dolans Bay, not far from where I live. It says: 'To my Majesty Queen Elizabeth II: it has been an honour and a privilege to have you as my Queen. You have been an outstanding role model of displaying strength and wisdom through grace and humility. Well done, thou good and faithful servant. You endured in this strength until the end. You are now in the joy of the Lord at your forever home. Bless you.'
Budget | Questions without Notice | House debates
Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.
Queensland: Floods | Questions without Notice | House debates
In addition to the disaster recovery payments that have been paid in Queensland, in addition to the extensive Australian Defence Force support that has been put in place, we have also joined with...
In addition to the disaster recovery payments that have been paid in Queensland, in addition to the extensive Australian Defence Force support that has been put in place, we have also joined with the Queensland government in a $558.5 million package of supports to support those impacted by the South East Queensland floods. The floods in northern New South Wales were a one-in-500-year event, and the advice we received from agencies was that those events qualified for an even higher level of funding that has ever been provided before because of the absolute intensify of that flood event in northern New South Wales. We'll continue to stand with all of those affected by the floods—and the swift response, the swift provision of payments to all of those affected by the floods and the additional support provided to those in northern New South Wales, where, as we even speak, the waters went over the levee this morning—we will be there with them to support them each and every step of the way.
I went to Enoggera Barracks with the Minister of Defence, and the Australian Defence Force had deployed—at four times the size of and almost a week faster than the response during the 2011...
I went to Enoggera Barracks with the Minister of Defence, and the Australian Defence Force had deployed—at four times the size of and almost a week faster than the response during the 2011 floods. I want to commend the ADF for the work they've done in south Queensland.
The Minister for Defence and I went out to Enoggera Barracks as they were preparing to go and support flood victims across South-East Queensland.
I thank the member for his question. The answer is, no, that is not the reason. Across New South Wales and Queensland, there were floods of different intensity. In northern New South Wales, there...
I thank the member for his question. The answer is, no, that is not the reason. Across New South Wales and Queensland, there were floods of different intensity. In northern New South Wales, there was a one-in-500-year flood, as advised to us by the scientific agencies who advise us on these matters. The member opposite would know that whether it was in the Hawkesbury or in South-East Queensland, the recovery payments that were made to flood victims were consistent with the disaster recovery payments that have always been paid in response to floods or bushfires. Those opposite may want to play politics with natural disasters but I am not going to do that. The federal government has made payments of $1.3 billion to 1.4 million Australians. The ADF has been on the ground in South-East Queensland—
New South Wales: Floods | Questions without Notice | House debates
I don't share the views of Mr Provest. And the support that the government has provided through the Australian defence forces—right now there are 3,280 Australian Defence Force members in...
I don't share the views of Mr Provest. And the support that the government has provided through the Australian defence forces—right now there are 3,280 Australian Defence Force members in the Northern Rivers, there to support people as right now they go through the unthinkable trauma of facing yet another flood, in a matter of just a number of weeks. In the seven local government areas that have been affected by these floods, the federal government has already made payments of $211,649,893.52. That is in a matter of weeks—delivering much-needed cash and income support for people who've been devastated by these floods. In total across New South Wales, some $2.1 billion, including these investments, has been allocated to support the people of New South Wales who are affected by these floods. Almost $1 billion has also been made available to support those impacted by the floods in South-East Queensland, including the investments we are making with the Queensland government. The rebuilding process will be a big task, and I thank again the member for Page, who I have no doubt that, rather than being here, would like to be back in his electorate, standing alongside his constituents, as I am sure the member for Richmond also would. An honourable member: She's there! If she's there, I commend her for being there, and I'm sure the member the Page would very much like to be there. I would cast no aspersions on a member of this place for being there or being here. I think that's very important. We are going to continue to stand by the people of the Northern Rivers, of South-East Queensland, of the Hawkesbury, all of which have been devastated by floods, but none more so than those in the Northern Rivers. And the response we've made to get the Australian Defence Force—after the floods hit, in the Northern Rivers, on that Sunday night, on Monday, by lunchtime, the Australian defence forces were winching people off roofs. They moved fast to get in there and help people and to ensure that they were carrying people to safety. I met one of those chopper pilots when I went there, and I spent time with the defence forces who had been assisting those in that local community—the dangers that they encountered. And they weren't the only ones I visited. I wasn't going to put cameras in people's faces; I went and sat with them in their homes, on their farms, in their businesses, and I listened carefully to the sort of support they needed. The Leader of the Opposition is barking across the table. What that demonstrates is we've got a Leader of the Labor Party who is very happy to— (Time expired)
Queensland Floods | Questions without Notice | House debates
I thank the member for her question. Since question time yesterday and question time today I have not had the opportunity to review that information, as you'd imagine, over the course of the last...
I thank the member for her question. Since question time yesterday and question time today I have not had the opportunity to review that information, as you'd imagine, over the course of the last 24 hours with the delivery of the budget and the many other matters that attended that. But I'll undertake to review the information that the member has raised and get back to her as soon as I can.
I understand. Our plan, the Australian people know, is set out in this budget. Our plan sets out investments in manufacturing, in energy, in dams, in roads and in lower taxes, ensuring we're...
I understand. Our plan, the Australian people know, is set out in this budget. Our plan sets out investments in manufacturing, in energy, in dams, in roads and in lower taxes, ensuring we're supporting Australians to deal with cost-of-living pressures right now. (Time expired)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. The investments and the economic interventions that this government made during the course of the pandemic saved the Australian economy. They kept 700,000 people in jobs....
Thank you, Mr Speaker. The investments and the economic interventions that this government made during the course of the pandemic saved the Australian economy. They kept 700,000 people in jobs. More than $40 billion of investment in our health response ensured we saved 40,000 lives, and on the global pandemic preparedness index Australia is rated second in the world. That's what it achieved—an achievement of the Australian people that has been barely matched anywhere around the world. We stepped up in the pandemic. What we hear from the opposition, with these chips about these issues, is that they're for it and they're against it; they're against it and they're for it. We've even heard it from the shadow shadow Treasurer over there, who is today saying they're going to support the cost-of-living measures even though they don't support them. That's what we've heard from the Labor Party. It's classic Labor Party: they support things just as much as they oppose things. That's why, on Thursday night, I'll be listening out for the alternative budget but I don't think I'll get one. I'll be listening out for it for the alternative plan.
I thank the member for his question. On debt and deficit, I can tell him that we've just had the biggest rebound in a budget in 70 years, and I haven't seen a prime minister do that in a very...
I thank the member for his question. On debt and deficit, I can tell him that we've just had the biggest rebound in a budget in 70 years, and I haven't seen a prime minister do that in a very long time in this place. Over the course of just the last 12 months we have had a $100 billion improvement in the budget over the forward estimates, which enables us to invest in the future, definitely, but also to provide cost-of-living relief here and now. I hear those opposite talk about debt and deficit, and they ask, 'What have we got to show for it?' We've got 700,000 people still in jobs to show for it. We've got a Western Sydney airport that's being built, which the Leader of the Opposition, when he was transport minister for six years, couldn't get off the ground. He couldn't even get it off the ground, and here he is chipping away, chipping away. He spoke about it for 11 years in opposition, whining, whining, whining about the Western Sydney airport. He had six years to do something about it, and he didn't even dig a hole.
It is very simple. The line item there shows the change from last year's midyear budget update of decisions taken but not yet announced, not-for-publication measures. What that means is, when...
It is very simple. The line item there shows the change from last year's midyear budget update of decisions taken but not yet announced, not-for-publication measures. What that means is, when that number goes into the negative, other numbers have gone into the positive. It comes out of that column and it goes into another column—genius! It goes down in one and it goes up in the other column. That is how a budget works. Those opposite don't know how to put a budget together. They have no idea. I would suggest the shadow Treasurer does not phone a friend either, if ever he ever becomes Treasurer, because his best mate on putting the budgets together was Wayne Swan. We all know what Wayne Swan did when he was putting budgets together. He assumed iron ore prices at $180 forever. He had mining taxes that didn't raise any money. Of those opposite who would be responsible for the economic management of this country, there's a Leader of the Opposition who's never delivered a budget. He spent six weeks on the Expenditure Review Committee and never delivered a budget. The shadow Treasurer has also never delivered a budget. On this side, our Treasurer has delivered four budgets. Our Prime Minister has delivered three budgets as a Treasurer, four budgets as a Prime Minister and one budget as a member of the Expenditure Review Committee. That's eight. I'll put my eight budgets up to your zero every single time, because zero is the amount of policy we've seen from those opposite. We often speak of net zero in this place. The Labor Party is net zero on policy. Honourable members inter jecting—
Sorry, I withdraw. I was referring to what should be a popular publication for those opposite, because this Leader of the Opposition has never delivered a budget and that shadow Treasurer has...
Sorry, I withdraw. I was referring to what should be a popular publication for those opposite, because this Leader of the Opposition has never delivered a budget and that shadow Treasurer has never delivered a budget. He was involved—
I know what the member opposite is referring to. If you will come with me, Mr Speaker, to page 49 of budget paper No. 2—it has a number 2 on it, in case you are not familiar with...
I know what the member opposite is referring to. If you will come with me, Mr Speaker, to page 49 of budget paper No. 2—it has a number 2 on it, in case you are not familiar with it—it refers to the decisions taken but not yet announced. What the member opposite doesn't understand—I am giving a lesson in budgets for dummies over there—