Alan Tudge's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
type: channel
language: en-gb
creator: OpenAustralia.org, mprss.php script
date: 2023-07-30T23:05:22+00:00
items: Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
items: Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2022-2023; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
items: Universities | Statements by Members | House debates
items: Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Education Legislation Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Victoria: Infrastructure | Private Members' Business | House debates
items: Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Cheaper Child Care) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Atomic Energy Amendment (Mine Rehabilitation and Closure) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Aston Electorate: Infrastructure | Constituency Statements | House debates
items: Child Care | Statements by Members | House debates
items: Research Commercialisation | Private Members' Business | House debates
items: Child Care | Questions without Notice | House debates
items: Address | Death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth Ii and Accession of His Majesty King Charles Iii | House debates

Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I'm disappointed that the member for Mackellar did not support the amendment which I moved in my name on behalf of the opposition, because the precise issues which she raised in relation to her...
encoded: I'm disappointed that the member for Mackellar did not support the amendment which I moved in my name on behalf of the opposition, because the precise issues which she raised in relation to her amendment were in relation to so-called integrity and transparency and also to examine workforce shortages in other areas. The amendment which I moved on behalf of the opposition precisely refers to those other areas to be examined to provide recommendations as to whether or not policies should be extended precisely to those other workforce areas where there may be shortages, whereas her amendment does not. Hence I made the comment before that I thought the amendment the opposition moved was a better one. Her amendment in itself also says that a review should occur after three years. We believe it should occur after two years. We suggested that it should have incorporated some consultation with particular groups—in particular, the National Rural Health Commissioner and the Regional Education Commissioner. Consequently, we will be seeking to again take up these other important measures in the Senate.
date: 2022-11-29T16:52:00+00:00

Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: Nimble!
encoded: Nimble!
date: 2022-11-29T16:37:00+00:00

Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I move opposition amendment (1) as circulated in my name: (1) Page 2 (after line 11), after clause 3, insert: 4 Review of Schedule 2 to this Act (1) The Minister must cause an independent review...
encoded: I move opposition amendment (1) as circulated in my name: (1) Page 2 (after line 11), after clause 3, insert: 4 Review of Schedule 2 to this Act (1) The Minister must cause an independent review to be conducted of the operation of the amendments made by Schedule 2 to this Act, with the purpose of assessing the expansion of the policy of waiving HELP debt to additional professions of high skills need in rural and remote Australia. (2) Without limiting subsection (1), the review must consider, and make recommendations to the Commonwealth Government about, the expansion of the policy implemented by the amendments to other sectors in rural and remote Australia, including the health, mental health and education sectors. (3) The review should consult widely with rural and remote communities and their health, mental health and education service providers and specifically, the following must be consulted as part of the review: (a) the National Rural Health Commissioner; (b) the Regional Education Commissioner. Timing of review (4) The review must start as soon as practicable after the end of the period of 2 years after the commencement of this Act. Review report (5) The persons who conduct the review must give the Minister a written report of the review within 3 months of the commencement of the review. (6) The Minister must cause a copy of the report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the report is given to the Minister. Government response to recommendations (7) As soon as practicable, and in any event within 3 months, after the report is first tabled in a House of the Parliament, the Minister must cause: (a) a statement, setting out the Commonwealth Government's response to each recommendation included in the report, to be prepared; and (b) the statement to be published on the Department's website. This amendment, which I tabled in my second reading speech, is an important one. The coalition pioneered this scheme, whic…
date: 2022-11-29T16:33:00+00:00

Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: The purpose of the Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 is to give effect to two changes which were previously introduced by the Morrison government. The first is a...
encoded: The purpose of the Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 is to give effect to two changes which were previously introduced by the Morrison government. The first is a substantial initiative for rural, regional and remote Australia, which is to give effect to the coalition's HELP for Rural Doctors and Nurse Practitioners measure announced in the 2021-22 MYEFO. This measure provides a partial or full higher education loan program, known as HELP, debt deduction for rural doctors and nurse practitioners who reside and practise in regional, rural or remote Australia once they complete their studies. The coalition introduced this measure to encourage doctors and nurse practitioners to relocate to rural and regional Australia by reducing their outstanding HECS-HELP debt. This is a substantial incentive, given that the HECS debt for doctors can be up to $100,000. The need for health professionals across regional and rural Australia is particularly important, though, with around one-third of our population—around eight million people—living in rural, regional and remote areas. It's of great concern that this group of Australians experience poorer health outcomes than those in metropolitan areas. According to the OECD Health at a glance report in 2017, Australians have one of the highest life expectancies in the world. But when we dig deeper into the data the life expectancy rates between people in metro areas and those in regional and remote areas differ by about five years, with even greater differentials for Indigenous Australians. Much of this is attributed to less access to preventative health services, such as GPs and nurse practitioners. Around 20 per cent of people in regional Australia report not having access to a general practitioner nearby. In fact, around 65,000 Australians have no access to GP services within an hour's drive of their home. Consequentially, they access less care and are at greater risk of death from preventable and tre…
date: 2022-11-28T17:44:00+00:00

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2022-2023; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: Those were very specific points.
encoded: Those were very specific points.
date: 2022-11-23T12:13:00+00:00

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2022-2023; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: Thanks, Jason. I appreciate it!
encoded: Thanks, Jason. I appreciate it!
date: 2022-11-23T12:13:00+00:00

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2022-2023; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: The minister just said that this budget delivers on their election commitments. As you can see, there weren't many election commitments in the Education portfolio from the Labor Party. They only...
encoded: The minister just said that this budget delivers on their election commitments. As you can see, there weren't many election commitments in the Education portfolio from the Labor Party. They only had nine years to work them up. They came up with four—no disrespect to this minister, who came in very late and was a bit of a surprise package announced by Prime Minister Albanese, putting aside Tanya Plibersek, who was the responsible shadow minister for so many years. There were four, and he has just outlined those four. I would like to focus on just one or two of them, but before doing so, could I raise a very pressing matter I have written to the education minister about. The reason it is so pressing is that it concerns our universities being clear and transparent to students about what sort of course they are going to get when they enrol at university next year. Is it going to be online? Is it going to be face to face? What proportions and how many hours are there likely to be of each? We all know that during the COVID period everybody shifted to online. Fair enough; we understand that. Some people prefer online. But students ought to know what they are going to get when they enrol in a course so they can make a proper selection. I've written to the minister in relation to this because the universities themselves aren't taking responsibility and providing that information to year 12 graduates. I would like to see the minister himself put that pressure on the universities for them to deliver upon it, because his response says it will just be dealt with by the accord, which is frankly too late. Year 12s are making decisions now, and I would like to see action taken in relation to that. I want to raise the issue of the 20,000 places, which the minister mentioned in his remarks and is indeed mentioned in the budget papers. The language in the budget papers was changed from '20,000' places to 'up to 20,000' places. My concern is that many of these 20,000 spots will, in fac…
date: 2022-11-23T11:47:00+00:00

Universities | Statements by Members | House debates
type: item
description: Across Australia, year 12 students are finishing their exams and making decisions about their studies next year—decisions that will define their future. But in a lot of cases they're making...
encoded: Across Australia, year 12 students are finishing their exams and making decisions about their studies next year—decisions that will define their future. But in a lot of cases they're making that decision without knowing the facts about whether their preferred university course will be taught face to face or online, or a mixture of both and in what ratio. This is unacceptable. I recently wrote to the Minister for Education and to Universities Australia, calling for this data to be published in full, immediately. I received a cursory response from the minister and nothing from the peak body. There's also a broader point here about the student learning experience at our universities. In many cases, it's not good enough and it's not delivering on what was promised. I hear constantly from students dissatisfied with their course, or getting online courses when they were promised face to face. Universities, like any other service provider, should be accountable for their service offering, particularly when students are paying thousands of dollars. If you ordered a Mercedes Benz and a three-year-old Corolla was delivered, you'd justifiably be unhappy with the outcome and feel entitled to a refund. If a university is not delivering quality, a refund should be provided to the students, and a new body, such as a university ombudsman, should be established to adjudicate on this. This would create the financial incentives for universities to lift their game. The government would get my full support if they took this up as a matter of urgency.
date: 2022-11-10T13:45:00+00:00

Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I've pointed out those two facts and I appreciate that the opposition don't want to hear that. They don't want to look at their own budget figures and they certainly don't want to look at the...
encoded: I've pointed out those two facts and I appreciate that the opposition don't want to hear that. They don't want to look at their own budget figures and they certainly don't want to look at the analysis from Professor Wooten from the University of Melbourne, which shows centralised bargaining actually produces lower wage increases than enterprise bargaining does. There have been tremendous concerns about this bill, particularly in relation to the pattern-bargaining provisions of the bill, right across the business community and, indeed, across the education sector as well—of course I have much to do with that as shadow education spokesperson. I know that the education sector, particularly the higher education sector, is concerned that the impacts of the bill will lead to pattern bargaining across universities. The universities themselves are large organisations that typically have thousands of staff, and sometimes many thousands of staff—130,000 altogether. Government members interjecting— And quite rightly! Deputy Speaker Buchholz, I know they're interjecting again over on the other side. They're calling out; they don't want to hear what I have to say. Indeed, they don't want to hear what the higher education sector has to say. They pointed out that the enterprise model, which they have presently, takes into account the financial health of the university, the unique student cohorts, the research profiles and the geographic location, which all helps in aiding an enterprise-bargaining agreement. This is versus an industrywide agreement, which is what this bill would lean towards, where you can't take into account those unique circumstances. It is just purely ridiculous to say that a university in Port Macquarie is exactly the same as a university in Parkville. They're not; there are different circumstances, the cost of living is different, and there are different research priorities, geographies, student cohorts and the like. Quite rightly, those academic staff should …
date: 2022-11-09T17:52:00+00:00

Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: Labor's proposed workplace changes presented in the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Wages) Bill represent the most radical shake-up of Australia's industrial relations system...
encoded: Labor's proposed workplace changes presented in the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Wages) Bill represent the most radical shake-up of Australia's industrial relations system since prior to the Hawke-Keating governments. In fact, they take us back to prior to the impressive reforms that they introduced. These were followed by the reforms of the Howard-Costello government that really set up our economy for the tremendous growth and prosperity that we've all enjoyed. This legislation is a reversal of that. The bill itself is called the 'secure jobs, better pay bill', but it's actually almost Orwellian in its title because, if anything, this will lead to less secure jobs and, in fact, it may well lead to lower pay rather than higher pay, which is their stated ambition. There are two pieces of data which support this conclusion. The first piece of data is looking at the budget papers themselves. I suggest to those opposite who are here, and there are many in the chamber: open up the budget that was introduced by Treasurer Chalmers just a few weeks ago. That budget itself says that real wages will decline over the next two years. That's what it says; you yourselves are admitting that, from this bill, real wages will decline while inflation continues to skyrocket along with the massive budget deficit continuing to increase. That's what it says. The other piece of evidence that is worth examining is the evidence presented by Professor Mark Wooden from the University of Melbourne. He's done analysis of different systems across the world as to which systems have produced higher wages over the last few years, bearing in mind that across the Western world wages have been depressed over the last decade. But there have been distinctions between the systems, and what Professor Wooden found from his analysis is that those systems in developed economies which were the most decentralised and had enterprise focused bargaining frameworks have actually experienced …
date: 2022-11-09T17:52:00+00:00

Education Legislation Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: The coalition will be supporting the Education Legislation Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. The purpose of the bill is to give effect to five measures introduced by the former coalition...
encoded: The coalition will be supporting the Education Legislation Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022. The purpose of the bill is to give effect to five measures introduced by the former coalition government, and then a further new measure by the new government to cease the 10 per cent discount for the upfront payment of student contributions. Five of the measures, which I'll go through, were introduced by our government. These are measures which I put in place when I was education minister. We introduce those into the parliament in February, but they lapsed by the time the election came around. I'm pleased that the government is picking up those five particular measures, which I'll go through in a moment, and adding a further measure, which I'd like to discuss as well in terms of our particular position on it. To go through each of those five measures to start with, they were a group of miscellaneous, disconnected measures. The first was to extend the FEE-HELP loan fee exemption to apply until 31 December 2022, with retrospective effect from 1 January 2022. For those who don't know, the FEE-HELP loan fee is the fee which the private higher education providers ordinarily pay and have been paying for quite some time. It's about 20 per cent, which is added to the FEE HELP debt, which a student has to pay. During the pandemic, we waived that additional 20 per cent loan fee, which was applied, and we made the decision at the end of last year to extend that exemption again, in effect waiving that 20 per cent for a further 12 months—until the end of this year. So those higher education providers took that measure on good faith and didn't apply that fee. I'm pleased that the government is now reintroducing this particular measure to make it lawful through this bill. This will help approximately 30,000 students in the process. The second measure is to support the development of microcredential courses by extending FEE-HELP eligibility for students accessing these. This is a …
date: 2022-11-08T12:23:00+00:00

Victoria: Infrastructure | Private Members' Business | House debates
type: item
description: and it just means people drive further along until they get to the next one. They also won't be funded. There's the Rowville-Monash rail, with $475 million allocated. That would have finally...
encoded: and it just means people drive further along until they get to the next one. They also won't be funded. There's the Rowville-Monash rail, with $475 million allocated. That would have finally connected Monash University to the rail line. It was there. It's been on the books for decades. It has also been axed. Have a look, though, at what has been funded. They've neglected the east. They got rid of the East West Link. They scrapped all these projects. What have they funded in this budget? I'll take you through some of them. We have the one that the member for Lalor was just referring to, the Ison Road overpass, in the member's own electorate. There's another one over in Corangamite, a marginal Labor seat. There's a further one, Camerons Lane interchange, in a marginal seat in McEwen, up in the north. There's a further one in McEwen for the Macedon and shire roads—another Labor marginal seat. There's another one for a business case upgrade in the Labor seats of Hawke and Gorton. There is one little project—$10 million only—for Gippsland, a safe National Party seat. Effectively, the money's been taken out of the eastern and south-eastern suburbs—as they always do, as they did with the East West Link scrapping—and put into Labor seats in the west and north, with one exception: $2.2 billion for Dan Andrews' pet project, the suburban rail loop, a project that will go from Box Hill down to Cheltenham—which no-one ever takes—for $35 billion. It hasn't been cleared by Infrastructure Australia. The business case didn't stack up. The Auditor-General found that it only got a 50c return for every dollar invested. But it's Dan Andrews' pet project on the eve of an election so that one gets funded as well. It's a disgrace, and the eastern and south-eastern suburban residents have been left out, yet again, by the Labor Party.
date: 2022-11-07T10:49:00+00:00

Victoria: Infrastructure | Private Members' Business | House debates
type: item
description: If ever there was an example of the Labor Party neglecting the eastern and south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne it is this year's infrastructure budget by the new Albanese government. When you look...
encoded: If ever there was an example of the Labor Party neglecting the eastern and south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne it is this year's infrastructure budget by the new Albanese government. When you look at what they did, effectively they cut so many projects from the eastern and south-eastern suburbs and placed a lot of money back over into the west of Melbourne—and, funnily enough, into their seats, many of which are marginal seats. I want to go through some of those key projects that have been cut. These are projects that, in many cases, have been on the books for decades and which, in many cases, have been prioritised by VicRoads themselves for more than a decade yet they have been cut from the budget. The money was there. We finally delivered the money for these projects but they've been cut. Let me take you through them. Perhaps the most obvious one is the duplication of Wellington Road. This was prioritised by VicRoads almost 15 years ago. The reason is that it was at capacity then. Back in 2016, there was a study done that showed 20,000 cars on this road every single day. It was full and, believe me, there's been a lot more traffic since. It's also had, in the five years up until that point, well over 100 crashes with many serious injuries and one fatality. It's a very dangerous road. It also happens to be the major evacuation route from any fires up in the Dandenongs. So it's a critically important road to be duplicated, and that was the funding that we got to get that to happen. Incidentally, the Labor Party matched the exact same funding. What have they done now, though, in this budget? That's gone. They promised it. We promised it. Money now gone. I'll also go through other projects that they've cut. There's the Dorset Road extension. There's been $80 million allocated. It's been on the books for decades. We finally delivered the money. This Labor government cut it: money gone. There's the Napoleon Road duplication, desperately needed for all of those residents …
date: 2022-11-07T10:49:00+00:00

Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Cheaper Child Care) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I will start my speech today by pointing out that the Prime Minister misled this parliament in his remarks in relation to this childcare bill, the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Cheaper...
encoded: I will start my speech today by pointing out that the Prime Minister misled this parliament in his remarks in relation to this childcare bill, the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Cheaper Child Care) Bill 2022. He came into this place and said that we were opposing this bill, when the member for Moncrieff, our spokesperson on this issue, categorically said in her speech on the second reading that we would not be opposing this bill. If the Prime Minister had any decency, he would come into this place and correct the record, because he was indeed misleading this parliament. We are not opposing this bill, because we do not want to stand in the way of families getting access to higher subsidies, but we do have concerns with this bill, and this is why we have moved the amendment which the member for Moncrieff put forward. Our concerns are fourfold. We have concerns that this will add to childcare inflation. We have concerns that this doesn't add to any supply of childcare places despite spending $4.5 billion. We've got concerns about workforce shortages which already exist and will just be exacerbated by this bill, and we've got concerns about this bill adding to the structural deficit of the budget when we know the budget is in serious deficit already and is going to get worse under this government, according to its own budget papers. I'll go through each of those in turn, but before doing so let me just say that the coalition has a very proud record in relation to child care. We doubled the spending when we were in office, to over $10 billion per annum. We supported 280,000 more children in the childcare system than there were when we first came to office. Women's workforce participation in this country hit record levels under our government, in part because of the childcare policies which we put in place. We gave access to child care, through various programs which we instituted, to dozens of locations which otherwise would not have had any access at all to ch…
date: 2022-10-26T12:40:00+00:00

Atomic Energy Amendment (Mine Rehabilitation and Closure) Bill 2022; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: The coalition supports the passage of the Atomic Energy Amendment (Mine Rehabilitation and Closure) Bill 2022. In 1999 an agreement was reached between the Commonwealth government and Energy...
encoded: The coalition supports the passage of the Atomic Energy Amendment (Mine Rehabilitation and Closure) Bill 2022. In 1999 an agreement was reached between the Commonwealth government and Energy Resources of Australia, known as ERA, that, upon the completion of mining activities at the Ranger mine in the Northern Territory, ERA would take charge of rehabilitating the Ranger mine site. Mining at Ranger ceased in January 2021 and remediation is already underway. The current framework allows ERA to undertake remediation work until January 2026. More than 20 years ago, it was believed that ERA would need only five years to complete rehabilitative work on the site. As a result, the authority set out a 'cease of operations' for mining works in January 2021, with the authority lapsing on 8 January 2026. However, following consultations with the previous and current governments, it was concluded that, to fully rehabilitate the site to higher contemporary standards, ERA would require more than the five years provided to complete the rehabilitation and monitoring required. This bill extends the legislative framework surrounding the rehabilitation, ensuring that ERA can complete rehabilitation, close out the site, continue monitoring and return the land to the traditional owners. The bill does not provide any authority for further mining on the site, which follows ERA's commercial decision to not pursue any further mine site extensions in 2015. Rather, the bill's primary purpose is to enable the long-term remediation and monitoring of the site. Primarily, it amends the legislation to allow the remediation authority to be milestone based rather than time based, keeping the onus on the responsible company to complete the rehabilitation. The coalition supports all mine rehabilitation being completed to high standards—and Australia has some of the most stringent environmental and rehabilitative standards and processes in the world—and supports ERA fulfilling their obligation to proper…
date: 2022-10-26T09:49:00+00:00

Aston Electorate: Infrastructure | Constituency Statements | House debates
type: item
description: I rise to express my grave concern that the new Labor government is about to abolish $5 million of funding which had been budgeted for the Tormore Reserve in my electorate. For those that don't...
encoded: I rise to express my grave concern that the new Labor government is about to abolish $5 million of funding which had been budgeted for the Tormore Reserve in my electorate. For those that don't know, Tormore Reserve is in Boronia. It's home to the Boronia Hawks Football Netball Club. It's in the poorest part of my electorate, where there's higher than normal unemployment and where there are, unfortunately, some of the issues associated with lower socioeconomic areas. We are doing everything we can to encourage people to participate in sport as a mechanism to get them off the street, to be engaged in the community and to be mentored by older people. This a great club that does great work, and they deserve a proper pavilion. This is $5 million, which was a budget decision. It wasn't an election commitment of ours; it was a budgeted decision. Yet there has been no action taken by the Labor government to try to do anything to see this through. My deep concern is that the Labor Party is about to scrap this funding. I'm also concerned that the Labor government is about to scrap the funding for several road projects in my electorate. This is money that has been set aside for years. It is budgeted money and it's going towards projects which have been on the books, in some cases, for decades, and we finally had the money to see these projects through. The state Labor government has stalled on these projects for years now. My concern is that the federal Labor government is now going to use the upcoming budget to scrap the funding of these projects. These are projects such as the Dorset Road extension, which has been on the books for decades, and the duplication of Napoleon Road—a desperately needed duplication in my electorate. I'm concerned that they may even scrap the $475 million allocated for Rowville Rail. This is, again, a project which has been on the books for decades and is desperately needed. We have almost half a billion dollars allocated for the first instalment—t…
date: 2022-09-28T09:48:00+00:00

Child Care | Statements by Members | House debates
type: item
description: The coalition has a proud record in relation to child care. We doubled spending on child care to over $10 billion per annum. We supported 280,000 more children in child care per annum than when...
encoded: The coalition has a proud record in relation to child care. We doubled spending on child care to over $10 billion per annum. We supported 280,000 more children in child care per annum than when we first came to office, and women's workforce participation reached record-high levels. Most importantly, we did so through targeted approaches which reduced inflationary pressures on child care. In fact, in the last financial year, childcare out-of-pocket costs came down by 4.6 per cent. This is in contrast to Labor's last time in office, when fees skyrocketed by 53 per cent in just six years. Labor's childcare plan, introduced today, will inevitably see fees skyrocket again and erode most of the promised benefits for families. This is because the package will add to demand but does not address the waitlists for services, the workforce shortages or the significant regional gaps. When introducing the childcare bill today, the minister promised that Labor's plan would not add to inflation. Australian families will be holding him to this promise.
date: 2022-09-27T13:57:00+00:00

Research Commercialisation | Private Members' Business | House debates
type: item
description: I move: That this House: (1) notes that in Government, the Coalition invested significantly in research and development, including an estimated $4.3 billion in 2020-21 through the education...
encoded: I move: That this House: (1) notes that in Government, the Coalition invested significantly in research and development, including an estimated $4.3 billion in 2020-21 through the education portfolio; (2) acknowledges that: (a) Australia stands internationally as one of the highest performing contributors to foundational research, being responsible for 2.7 per cent of the world's scientific output, compared to being home to 0.34 per cent of the world's population; and (b) in terms of research translation and commercialisation, Australian does not meet the same high performing reputation; (3) further notes that the previous Government: (a) agreed in February 2022 to a ten-year Research Commercialisation Action Plan to drive greater utilisation of research and collaboration with industry; and (b) budgeted $2.2 billion to support its Research Commercialisation Action Plan to boost Australia's economic recovery, including: (i) $1.6 billion for Australia's Economic Accelerator to establish a stage-gated program to support translation and commercialisation in the six National Manufacturing Priority Areas; (ii) $243 million for the Trailblazer Universities Program to select universities to partner with industry to work on research; and (iii) $296 million to support greater collaboration through 1,800 industry-focused PhDs and 800 industry fellowships over ten years; and (4) calls on the Government to commit to implementing the Coalition's Research Commercialisation Action Plan in full and on-time, first with introducing legislation to establish Australia's Economic Accelerator. Research commercialisation was a strong focus of the coalition government in our last term of governance. Why is that? In part it's because it goes to the heart of our economy, because when we do good research and we translate that into new products, new ways of doing things and new industries then we're growing the economy, we're creating new jobs and, ultimately, we're improving productivity. Inde…
date: 2022-09-26T11:00:00+00:00

Child Care | Questions without Notice | House debates
type: item
description: Why isn't Anne Aly answering this? She's the childcare minister. She's been sidelined.
encoded: Why isn't Anne Aly answering this? She's the childcare minister. She's been sidelined.
date: 2022-09-26T14:34:00+00:00

Address | Death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth Ii and Accession of His Majesty King Charles Iii | House debates
type: item
description: A little over a month ago I was speaking to the assembly at Boronia Heights Primary School as we officially opened the ring of trees planted around the oval to mark the Queen's jubilee. I said to...
encoded: A little over a month ago I was speaking to the assembly at Boronia Heights Primary School as we officially opened the ring of trees planted around the oval to mark the Queen's jubilee. I said to the children that the trees and the accompanying new seating were to honour and to recognise one of the most remarkable people of the last century and that, hopefully, in years to come, children will sit on the marked chairs and reflect on who she was and her incredible service. Today, with the Queen's passing, I have no doubt that this will occur, as it will occur at the hundreds of existing monuments to Her Majesty and the many more that will be erected in the months and years ahead. This will occur not just because of who she was and her longevity as a monarch but because of the values she represented and those we may have lost. The longevity of the Queen's reign is remarkable in itself. Few of us in this parliament were even born when she came to the throne in February 1952. She was the longest-serving English monarch in history. She witnessed 16 Australian prime ministers, from Menzies to Anthony Albanese, and 15 British ones. As senior journalist Paul Kelly notes, 'At every juncture she upheld constitutional propriety.' She loved our country. She visited often, but she always respected the wishes of our nation. Even when Prime Minister Paul Keating informed her of his desire to become a republic, she replied impeccably, saying: I will, of course, take the advice of Australian ministers and respect the wishes of the Australian people. When she became Queen, it was almost a different world both here and globally. We were just 10 million people. We were a relatively inward-looking country then. We were largely monocultural. Television had not even come to our shores. Today the world is so different, with the internet, globalisation, modern multicultural society and alternative powers. But through it all the Queen endured. She was the constant in our lives for 70 years. S…
date: 2022-09-23T10:43:00+00:00