Terri Butler's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Ukraine | Statements on Indulgence | House debates
Recently, I attended the Ukrainian church in my electorate. It's a small church in Woolloongabba. I attended alongside the state member for Greenslopes, Joe Kelly MP, and Queensland minister...
Recently, I attended the Ukrainian church in my electorate. It's a small church in Woolloongabba. I attended alongside the state member for Greenslopes, Joe Kelly MP, and Queensland minister Leanne Linard. Senator Anthony Chisholm was with us. Also in attendance was Australia 's Governor-General, who had come to this small church in Woolloongabba in my electorate, as we all did, to stand in solidarity with the Ukrainian people. As we listened to the service, as we stood with them, we wanted to express our strong support for the Ukrainian community of Australia, the diaspora here, but to all people from Ukraine who are facing a really terrible and unjust war being waged upon them. I think it's important to stand up against imperialism, to stand up against oppression. I want to pay tribute to every Ukrainian person who is standing in defiance, whether at home or abroad, against this unjust war. It was quite remarkable to me. I had not been to a Ukrainian church service before. We were in this small church but it was really full. The service is sung, and there was this beautiful singing ringing out through the church, in defiance of what was happening in their homeland, and in support for one another. Probably the most remarkable part of this service was when Father Stefan gave the homily. The homily was about forgiveness. It was quite remarkable to be with those people and to hear those words. I want to pay tribute to him, Father Stefan, and Father Martin, who were there with the parishioners. I also want to pay tribute to the Ukrainian Community of Queensland Inc., which is the community group for Ukrainians in my home state. They organised a good attendance at that service and, subsequent to it, organised a really big, well-attended and impeccably conducted—while I was there, at least—rally in King George Square. It was attended by a number of my colleagues as well as representatives from the broader community but was led by the Ukrainian community. At that rally, that we all attended after the church service, we saw a sea of blue and yellow. We saw defiance. We saw resistance. We saw hope. These are a people who believe that they will prevail in this war, that this unjust war will come to an end and that their people will continue and that their nation will continue. It was an interesting day. It was during the Brisbane floods. It was 6 March, this rally, and the Brisbane floods, as you probably know, had been happening twice a day for several days in the lead-up to that day. People were still cleaning up. It was incredibly humid and there was mud everywhere. But it was really heartening to see that people took time out even of a disaster to come to King George Square, in the centre of Brisbane, and show that solidarity. A number of us did that. I want to say congratulations to Peter Bongiorni, the president of the UCQ, and his mum, who very clearly played a big part in the organising of the rally, his partner, the immediate past president of the UCQ and all the members of the committee and the organisation, who'd clearly been working tirelessly in the face of a natural disaster—in the face of war at home—to organise this opportunity for the community to come together and to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine. More broadly, it's important for all of us in this parliament to express our support for Ukrainians, who are going through a terrifying and difficult time facing this unjust war, to acknowledge their capacity for defiance, to acknowledge their willingness to stand up. I mentioned the floods. I was thinking during the floods about the Ukrainians while I was out putting sandbags in trucks and making sure the community groups had the connections they needed to deliver services. My counterparts from the Ukrainian parliament, in Ukraine, had their Twitter feeds full of members of parliament having to learn how to use a gun and making the decision to stay in the capital to fight. It was quite humbling. But the story isn't about members of parliament. It isn't even about President Zelenskyy, no matter how brave and no matter how much leadership he and his family have shown. The story is about individual Ukrainians, everyday people living everyday lives, who all of a sudden are being bombed and facing this campaign against them, who are nonetheless standing together and facing it down. I want to pay tribute to them. Of course, we've heard from other speakers that Labor stands in solidarity with Ukrainians, as does every member of this parliament, I expect, and as does the nation. I'm certainly very pleased to be part of an opposition, an alternative government, that is willing to render any assistance we can practically provide to the people of Ukraine as they face down this threat, this unjust war, this autocratic regime. I'm proud to be part of a democracy; I'm proud of our democracy. As a strong democracy it is incumbent upon us to stand up for democracy, it is incumbent upon us to stand up against unjust wars. I'm proud to be a small part of an international effort to stand up for these principles that we all believe in. I again say thank you to all members of the Queensland Ukrainian community and all members of the Australian Ukrainian community for the work they are doing to provide opportunities to stand in solidarity. To those who fight, to those who are at home in Ukraine, to those who are trying to care for children or elderly loved ones, to those who are trying to resist or to those who are just trying to survive: we see you and we stand in solidarity with you.
New South Wales: Floods, Queensland: Floods | Statements on Indulgence | House debates
Communities in my electorate were also among those affected by the deluge and the floods at the end of February and the beginning of March this year. Homes and businesses in Hill End, West End,...
Communities in my electorate were also among those affected by the deluge and the floods at the end of February and the beginning of March this year. Homes and businesses in Hill End, West End, South Brisbane, Kangaroo Point, Norman Park, Coorparoo, Stones Corner, Hawthorn, Bulimba, Morningside and other areas were all affected by the rain bomb, as it's been called, and by the floods that followed. I want to take this opportunity to thank multiple organisations and individuals for their efforts during and after that weather event and those floods. I know that my fellow representatives would be equally grateful to all of these groups. Let me start with community centres, locally based charities and emergency relief organisations. West End Community House (Community Plus) was a great place for people to get hot meals. Food was being exchanged there and we had services being provided there. Micah Projects is a terrific organisation. They supported a lot of people, including by setting up a temporary place of warmth and shelter where people could get food. They did that in cooperation with the Australian Hellenic Progress Association, the Greek community association, which has quite a famous hall. The Bee Gees once played there. The hall was used for emergency relief during the floods in West End. Orange Sky laundry were of help in the floods. Red Cross, the Salvos, Meals on Wheels and Foodbank, who are based in my electorate, did so much work during the floods. The same is true of FareShare, a big commercial kitchen which turns Foodbank food and other donated food into ready-made meals. A rapid response team turned out to support workers who were helping others with the floods and to support the community. Backbone, the arts organisation, the East Brisbane Bowls Club and the 'Save our Bowlo' campaign set up a temporary relief place at East Brisbane, which was also affected by floods, to assist people who needed a hot meal. There is a photo on my Instagram of Sally, who was serving meals on their first night there—and I've got to tell you the food smelled absolutely delicious. At the YMCA Cannon Hill Community Centre, at the former Cannon Hill bowlo, Wendy and Alison and the volunteers were helping with food exchange but also with things like collecting toiletries. They ran a toiletries donation service for people affected by the floods, which was really important. There were also multiple residents groups. The Bulimba Community Centre, for example, helped out in the Bulimba community. Kurilpa Futures, on the Kurilpa Peninsula, did a lot of the initial volunteer coordination to make sure that people who needed help were connected with people who wanted to give it. The West End Community Association provided a sort of information exchange and clearinghouse for services. I want to thank the workers in multiple government agencies in all spheres of government that provided support. That includes Services Australia—and another big shout-out to our local liaison, Frank, at Services Australia and Centrelink, and also to the executive, Michelle, who I spoke to on a number of occasions during the floods—Miyun, from the NRRA; and Andrew, the CEO of the Bureau of Meteorology, and all of his team, who were incredibly responsive and so helpful in getting ahead of us with all the information. Those are all federal agencies, but there were plenty of other agencies as well. A big shout-out to Rhys, from Energex, who installed a new transformer down at Hill End. I was doorknocking—I was basically doing welfare checks during the floods—and residents were telling me that one of the problems with the electricity down at West End and Hill End was a transformer that was below the flood line. I harassed the state government about this and, next minute, Mick de Brenni, the minister, turned out the Energex guys to move that transformer. It was absolutely terrific to see them being so responsive. So I thank everyone from Energex. I thank everyone from Maritime Safety Queensland, who worked incredibly hard to look after the entire Brisbane River—and a shout-out to my good friend Matt, who works in MSQ. He was involved in getting that crane to safety—all Brisbane people know about that crane. I thank everyone at the Morningside sandbag depot. The team got up at three o'clock to come in from Ipswich, where they were also facing flooding, and other areas. They were lifting sandbags and helping the locals to look after the properties in the flood event. That was quite a big effort from them; it was just incredible. We had a great chat to Jerry in between forklift loads and sandbags. He said, 'Could you also just cook the barbecue?' We were very happy to do that. Unfortunately, we couldn't get the barbecue to work, first off. I also want to add my thanks to the team at Buranda 'Guzies', Guzman y Gomez. I rolled in and said, 'Hey, could we have 20 different hot breakfasts, all with guacamole?' They dropped everything and got them out the door for us—at 6.30 am—to look after those depot workers. Thank you so much to everyone who travelled to Morningside to help the entire south of Brisbane with sandbags that day. It was incredible work from them and the people at 'Guzies'. Thank you also to the ferry staff, the public transport staff, all the Brisbane City Council clean-up crew and the people managing waste. There was a lot of waste out of these floods because of the inundation of so many properties, particularly around West End but also through Hawthorne and other areas. I can only imagine what waste crews were dealing with. I thank Urban Utilities staff, who we had to call on when there were a range of problems with the Urban Utilities infrastructure in West End, where the basements of the big apartment buildings had been flooded. I thank the department of communities staff, departmental staff from various other departments' ministerial office staff, transport and traffic people, SEQ Water—all of these different agencies who are working to keep people safe. I give a big shout-out to my own staff—who did everything from hauling sandbags to cooking barbecues to cleaning up community organisations to washing dishes—as well for all the help they provided. And, of course, I thank the Australian Defence Force, who were working so hard to help the clean-up. I want to say thank you to all the local businesses who supported. They made donations, food and provided phone charging. Avid Reader even had washing machines and dryers at their bookshop. It was quite incredible. But there are too many businesses to name. They were all so supportive. Insurance industry workers and the Insurance Council of Australia: thank you for your engagement with the locals. Thank you to our wonderful local churches and other religious groups, some from further afield as well—you know who you are—who provided hot meals, a place to shelter, a place to charge the phone and, in some cases, financial support to people who are doing it tough. Thank you to our locally based media organisations, who were a crucial instrument during these floods to keep people safe: ABC Brisbane, 4AAA 98.9 Indigenous radio, and Jan Bowman from the Westender who was keeping everyone informed through the flood event. I want to give a shout-out to a couple of unions: the United Firefighters Union, who let us perch a barbecue on Montague Road so that we could give people some hot meals who hadn't had a hot meal in a couple of days, including some people who had been in really serious distress; and the Electrical Trades Union, for their campaign Operation Energise to get electricians to help flood-affected people all through the inner south-east. I want to give a shout-out to the Bulimba RSL as well. They cooked a barbecue for people who'd been campaigning on the big volunteer questions down at Bulimba, Hawthorne and Balmoral. They brought together everyone from businesses to community groups to just locals helping out, fed them all a snag and had a yarn with them. Thank you to all of our SES volunteers, who have been absolutely sterling. We all saw the grief that our community felt when an SES volunteer from further afield, from Lowood, died. I'm sure Mr Neumann, the member for Blair, who is here today, will mention it. Our hearts really went out to her family. I think every SES volunteer and everyone who drew on their help was reminded once more how valuable SES volunteers are to our community and how grateful we need to be for them. I want to say thanks to all of the current and former MPs and counsellors who helped out in the area. I want to say thanks to community members—everyone; mums, dads, kids—who went and helped out at places like Eastern Suburbs Tigers that went under, like the Brisbane Jazz Club at Kangaroo Point, like the netball courts at the Metropolitan Districts Netball Association in Coorparoo, all of the many different organisations that required clean-up. People went and did everything they could to help them out. I give a big shout-out to Labor Party volunteers as well who were helping us to make sure that we were cooking a barbecue, knocking on doors to do welfare checks, holding stalls to provide information about federal support that was available and other forms of support that were available, and even turning up with their camp batteries so people could charge their phones. One of our local councillors, Kara Cook, now has a campaign going on back-flow devices. I encourage everyone who's concerned about back-flow devices to have a look at her social media. I'm also running a survey of my own to get feedback about what needs to be done better in future disasters, and I welcome everyone's feedback. A lot of people are now seeing, really up close and personal, the impacts of climate change and they want to see real action on climate change. I'm hearing from people on that. I'm also hearing from people about how to respond to disasters and what they would like to see in the future: things like making sure there's no differential between different states when it comes to disaster payments and making sure we have Centrelink personnel in the field without having to have an argument about it, so just basic responses. I want to give a big shout-out to the Northern Rivers, who my community is also deeply concerned about.
Cass, Hon. Dr Moses Henry (Moss) | Condolences | House debates
I rise to make a contribution in the condolence motion for Moss Cass, the Hon. Moses Henry Cass, who was Australia's first environment and conservation minister in, of course, the Whitlam...
I rise to make a contribution in the condolence motion for Moss Cass, the Hon. Moses Henry Cass, who was Australia's first environment and conservation minister in, of course, the Whitlam government. We've heard some really terrific condolence speeches for Moss Cass in the main chamber in support of this condolence motion, and, as the shadow environment minister, I wanted to make a contribution as well, to recognise the really nation-changing work that he did as our first environment and conservation minister. He was also, more broadly, someone of very progressive bent. You heard him described yesterday, or the day before, as 'the minister for lost causes' in the Whitlam government. But they weren't lost causes; he was just well ahead of his time. He was a proponent for legalising cannabis. He was a proponent for legalising abortion. He was a proponent for legalising homosexuality. He was a pioneer of universal health care. He was responsible for creating the SBS. He was responsible for issuing experimental radio licences, forming the basis for community radio broadcasting here in Australia. He was someone whose activism has left an indelible mark on Australia. And Australian society—in some cases, decades later—has caught up to him. I remember reading, in a biography, actually, of Harriet Harman, the UK Labour deputy leader and former acting leader, that she talked about the phenomenon where what was considered to be radical could then turn into orthodoxy. And that's certainly a hallmark of Labor: sometimes what we put forward can be described by some as radical, but it later becomes orthodoxy and seems, in retrospect, to have been inevitable. And you could certainly say that about Dr Cass and the work that he did and the ideas that he had. Deputy Speaker, I know that you would have an affinity with Dr Cass—both of you medical practitioners and people who stand strongly for environmental protection and conservation. Isn't it terrific that we have a tradition of medical doctors who come to this place? They bring their medical expertise. They also bring a progressive approach and a commitment to many causes much broader than their own discipline and professional capacity. With respect to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and with respect to the late Dr Cass, doctors understand that everything is interconnected—that, to be a healthy society, we have to look at all of the determinants of health, and that, to be a good and just society, we must have laws and frameworks and policy decisions that promote better arrangements for our society and better arrangements for our natural environment as well. And that includes conservation. Dr Cass instituted the most significant environmental legislation in the postwar period. He instituted the predecessor to today's environmental laws, a really important framework for assessing the impact that developments have on the environment. Again, it just seems like orthodoxy today: it is inevitable that we would assess the impacts of projects and development on the environment. But Dr Cass brought in this framework in the mid-1970s, and it really was the predecessor. Former Deputy Prime Minister Brian Howe AO has said that Dr Cass was responsible for the most important environmental legislation in Australia's postwar period. He's been quoted as saying that. And that's right. And Dr Cass was responsible not just for our domestic environmental law, for ensuring that we have in this country the right domestic settings for environmental protection, he was also a pioneer on the international stage in relation to developing international movements and international frameworks for environmental protection and conservation. I want to mention a few examples of that work. In June 1973, Dr Cass announced that the cabinet had decided that Australia would sign the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. He said: 'Cabinet's decision meant that the Customs Act and regulations would be amended so that international trade in the species will be prohibited. A decision was taken to protect a number of mammals, birds and reptile that have been designated at the conference to conclude the international convention.' So he was a leader in making sure that Australia supported this really significant international convention; and he talked about what else we could do, as a country, to demonstrate leadership in relation to species protection. Dr Cass also announced in 1974 a bilateral treaty with the Japanese government to protect migratory birds and birds in danger of extinction and their environment. That was a bilateral treaty of great significance. In fact, last week I was at a former golf course that is being turned into an environmental precinct in Victoria and the environmentalists and local government representatives there were talking to me about the Japanese snipe. So it's quite interesting to reflect that, before I was born, the first environment and conservation minister was issuing releases about what more Australia could do in a bilateral approach with Japan to protect that particular migratory bird. He was very committed to the conservation and protection of biodiversity, including those migratory birds. The significance of this is vast. I suspect he was incredibly proud that Australia became the first full party to the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance. He made that announcement in May 1974, a little while after the Japanese bilateral agreement. He said, 'By signing the wetlands convention, Australia has become the first full party to it.' He noted that other nations, like Finland, Iran, the UK and several others, were close to signing it or were going to sign. This, I think, demonstrates that Dr Cass was willing to take this international leadership to really push for treaties to be a basis for environmental protection. It was in the context of Australia becoming the first full party to that convention that there was then triggered an obligation on us as a nation to designate at least one wetland for the list to be made under that treaty, and that is how Australia came to list the Cobourg Peninsula on the Northern Territory coastline, north-west of Darwin, on that list of wetlands of international significance. As was said at the time, this was a further example of Labor's high level of activities in nature conservation, which has included enthusiastic acceptance of our international obligations. Again, this is an example of what Australia can be when it comes to environmental protection. We can be a country with domestic laws that facilitate environmental protection and conserve biodiversity. We can also, despite us not being a large country by population, be a beacon for the international community of what environmental protection can be. We can do those things. I think it would be wonderful to see the election of an Albanese Labor government that had a disposition towards Australia demonstrating leadership in the world in relation to environmental protection. I also want to mention Dr Cass's announcement in 1973 of a national water policy. Water policy in this country has been fraught since before Federation. There have always been struggles—I guess that would be the right word—in respect of the allocation of water, the use of water and ensuring that water is available for all of its uses, whether they be leisure, human need, environmental, cultural or agricultural. So it is incredibly significant that in 1973 Dr Cass announced a comprehensive policy statement for the future management of Australia's water resources. He said in the announcement that this was the first time there'd been an overall policy framework advanced for the future management of Australia's scarce water resources. Don't we know today how important it is to actually have a national approach? Hasn't that been demonstrated to us by the consequences of the current government's decision almost a decade ago to abolish the National Water Commission and to really vacate the field when it comes to ensuring that we have an appropriate national water policy? In 1973, when he announced this comprehensive policy statement, Dr Cass said, 'This policy statement commits the Australian government to ensuring the development of water resources will be fully integrated into the economic, social and environmental planning of the nation.' Quite a different approach, one would argue, is being adopted by the current government. I want to mention two other examples of environmental protection from Dr Cass that are of great significance to me as the shadow environment minister but also to my home state of Queensland. Firstly, I want to mention the prevention of sand mining on Fraser Island. I've got many friends who are involved in the Fraser Island Defenders Organisation—FIDO, as they're called. This was a matter of great significance to Queenslanders and to the entire nation, and it was Dr Cass who laid the groundwork and established the framework for the end of sand mining on Fraser Island. It was not done until 1976, but it was done as a result of a recommendation of the Fraser Island environmental inquiry. That inquiry had been established pursuant to section 11 of that environment protection legislation that I spoke about earlier. Decades later, Fraser Island was actually inscribed on the World Heritage List. That was a nomination from the Hawke government, and it was building on the work that Dr Cass did in the Whitlam government that allowed that to occur. The other thing I want to acknowledge, and this has been acknowledged by everyone who has spoken in this debate, is that it was Dr Cass who, in the Whitlam government, established the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act. That established the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to really protect and care for the entire Great Barrier Reef region. Dr Cass laid the groundwork for the protection of the Great Barrier Reef. These are Whitlam government achievements and these are Dr Cass's achievements. I know that all of us in Labor are so grateful to him for the work that he did for environmental protection and for the broader work that he did for our country. We feel very deeply the loss of Dr Cass, the first environment and conservation minister not just for Labor but for the nation. We express our sincere condolences to his family, to all who loved him, to the environment protection movement. All Australians have really lost a giant.
Queensland Floods | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday I raised the predicament of the Khan family in my electorate, who had one member approved for a flood relief payment and others rejected. They were...
My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday I raised the predicament of the Khan family in my electorate, who had one member approved for a flood relief payment and others rejected. They were without power for 27 days. I provided further information to the Prime Minister's office as requested. Can the Prime Minister confirm that instead of providing further assistance, his government is now demanding that the only member of the Khan family to receive the flood payment pay it back?
Morrison Government | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Last night 10 news revealed the Prime Minister plans to sack the education minister after parliament rises this week. Can the Prime Minister confirm his...
My question is to the Prime Minister. Last night 10 news revealed the Prime Minister plans to sack the education minister after parliament rises this week. Can the Prime Minister confirm his government is falling down around him with cabinet leaks, damaging text message leaks and even the sacking of ministers now being leaked to undermine the Prime Minister?
Koalas | Statements by Members | House debates
BUTLER () (): The 2020 bushfires were really damaging for Australia's koala populations on the east coast. We know that to be the case. Yet, it wasn't until two years after those fires started...
BUTLER () (): The 2020 bushfires were really damaging for Australia's koala populations on the east coast. We know that to be the case. Yet, it wasn't until two years after those fires started that the minister finally received advice on whether to uplist to increase the protection status of the koala. For some unexplained reason, it wasn't until three months later that she actually announced the decision to uplist the koala from vulnerable to endangered. But why would we expect anything better from this government other than delay, obfuscation and failure? In fact, this government is the government that has actually managed—you wouldn't believe it—to fail to produce a koala threatened species recovery plan. This recovery plan is more than six years overdue. In that time, the koala protection status has been uplisted. It is an absolute disgrace that this government's failures in relation to the environment are being visited upon our iconic national treasure, the koala, but also on so many other threatened species that this country is failing to protect under the leadership of the Morrison-Joyce government. It's about time they stepped up, did the right thing and took real action to protect koalas and all threatened species, as our country deserves.
Link-Up Queensland | Constituency Statements | House debates
Today, a local organisation based in my electorate of Griffith that facilitates reunions of members of the stolen generations and their families is holding an event to commemorate the 14th...
Today, a local organisation based in my electorate of Griffith that facilitates reunions of members of the stolen generations and their families is holding an event to commemorate the 14th anniversary of the national apology given by then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. It's an event that I try to attend every year, and today I'm so sad not to be able to be there with Link-Up Queensland and all of the people who are joining together to commemorate this significant day. They're at QPAC and they're having an event at which people will be making speeches, including members of the stolen generations themselves, about our nation's history and our nation's future. I want to say to those people who are gathering together at Southbank that I do wish very much that I were with you today to commemorate this really significant occasion. I want to particularly acknowledge any of the stolen generations who have any connection with the former Cranbrook house, which is one of the places where people were taken and which Link-Up Queensland has had a long history of addressing in terms of bringing people back together. I also want to acknowledge the CEO of Link-Up, Ms Pat Thompson AM. I really wish to congratulate her as well as acknowledge her. She was recently appointed as a Member of the Order of Australia, which was well-deserved. She'll be there today and she'll be making sure that she continues that serious and solemn work of bringing together and reuniting families. I also want to acknowledge everyone else from Link-Up Queensland who works so hard to bring people together. These reunions can sometimes be very joyful occasions, but they can sometimes be very sad occasions, particularly the graveside reunions which unfortunately feature all too often in the work of Link-Up Queensland. Of course, today this parliament will be acknowledging the anniversary of the apology. Each year, we remember the Bringing them home report, which was tabled in the federal parliament on 26 May 1997 following a national inquiry commenced under the Keating government. That report recommended that there be an apology. It really emphasised the importance of apology and acknowledgement. It said the first step in any compensation and healing for victims of gross violations of human rights must be an acknowledgement of the truth and the delivery of an apology. That apology was finally given by then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, as I said, in 2008. As I said, it's the 14th anniversary of it this year, so I want to thank Kevin for that.
Religious Discrimination Bill 2021, Religious Discrimination (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2021, Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill 2021; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I'm not religious, I've never been baptised, but I show respect to those who are religious. Anyone who's read Umberto Eco's letters to the cardinal, for example, can appreciate how a...
I'm not religious, I've never been baptised, but I show respect to those who are religious. Anyone who's read Umberto Eco's letters to the cardinal, for example, can appreciate how a non-religious person can nonetheless learn from and draw from the lessons of religion. I certainly attend church services quite frequently, as the member for Blair knows, not out of my own belief but out of respect for my constituents and for others who are religious. For example, this week I attended the ecumenical service at the Greek Orthodox Church of Saint Nicholas for the opening of the parliament, just as the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Blair did. I listened to the archbishop's sermon, in which he drew on scripture, etymology and philosophy from a number of sources to tell us that inherent in personhood is love for other persons. To me, that implies that we should continue to work towards making sure that everyone, whether they share our values or not, whether they share our identities or not, can live their lives fully as their authentic selves. Of course, the Leader of the Opposition's reading from Corinthians made the same point in a different way. It was about the qualities of love that require us to have respect for others, not for our own benefit or out of our own sense that they are like us but because inherently they should receive it from us. For me, this means that it is important that we as a parliament continue, from a secular perspective also, to heed in different ways these same lessons: that people are inherently deserving of dignity, that people should be treated with dignity and that people should be equal before the law. One of the ways we in parliaments do that in the law is by continuing to broaden antidiscrimination laws to give effect to international obligations such as those in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This covenant protects religious freedom and the right to freedom of conscience, thought and religion. I believe that this parliament should, as the Goss government did more than 30 years ago, legislate to prohibit discrimination on the grounds of religion, just as this parliament did under the Whitlam government to prohibit discrimination on the grounds of race and the Hawke government did to prohibit discrimination on the grounds of sex. I want to pay particular tribute to the late Susan Ryan for the Sex Discrimination Act. Later, that same government prohibited discrimination on the grounds of disability, and, I will confess, the coalition government in 2004 prohibited discrimination on the basis of age. All of these bills have helped us to give effect to our obligations under the ICCPR and the rights that are protected under that international instrument. But these laws have also given effect to basic human decency and the ability to live free from discrimination, so, given Labor's long history of standing up for human rights and for antidiscrimination laws, I believe that no-one should be surprised that Labor supports protections against discrimination on the ground of religion. I would like to see us as a parliament introduce national protections against discrimination on the basis of religion. As a lawyer, I did some discrimination law. I remember one person who'd converted to a different religion and was suddenly getting treated differently at work. I remember reading a case of a prisoner who was being denied halal meals in prison, and using the discrimination laws in relation to religion. These are important matters. These are not trifling matters. Just as our national law protects from discrimination on the grounds of sex, family responsibilities, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, marital status, relationship status, breastfeeding, race, disability and age, we should protect against discrimination on the ground of religion. Everyone who's been discriminated against for wearing a turban or a cloak or a robe or a hijab, ought to have the knowledge that this parliament will stand up for their rights, and we should do that. There are some serious shortcomings with this bill. This parliament should also amend those provisions to minimise those shortcomings. But, more importantly, it should also take this opportunity to proactively and positively improve our antidiscrimination laws. The member for North Sydney talked about the provision of the Sex Discrimination Act that positively allows for discrimination against school students. That provision says: … Nothing in section 21 renders it unlawful for a person to discriminate against another person on the ground of the other person's sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy in connection with the provision of education or training… that is conducted in accordance with the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of a particular religion or creed, if the first-mentioned person so discriminates in good faith in order to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion or creed. That is the current law that is in force today and has been in force for decades. It is not a new provision that this bill of the government's is seeking to insert into the sex discrimination law. It is the existing law and it is no longer, if it ever was, fit for purpose. As the member for North Sydney said, this government's Religious Discrimination Bill gives us as a parliament the opportunity to right this historic wrong by altering the Sex Discrimination Act to remove the licence for discrimination that it provides against students. Those people—and there are many who have been raising concerns with me about the rights of gay or lesbian students, bisexual students or students with diverse gender identities, for example—would, I believe, want us to take every opportunity to seek to reduce the capacity for discrimination against those kids. I would say that particularly trans kids, whose identity reveals itself at quite a young age, I think, compared to sexuality issues, are vulnerable, and we must protect them. We would be remiss if we did not take this opportunity to seek to resolve this problem that currently exists in law, and one of the ways that we can do that is to seek to include an amendment in this bill to remove discrimination, to try, as we have the power to do in this parliament, to protect those students. We can do that with this bill. We can move that amendment, and if this House supports it, or if it's supported in the Senate, we can right this historic wrong and we can improve the circumstances for young people and children who are gender diverse, who have diverse sexualities. That ought to occur. It's important, and we should pursue it. The other matter that we have an opportunity to address right now by amending this bill is the absence of religious vilification laws in this country at a national level. Again, we have them in my state, in the state laws, but we don't have a national antivilification law that protects on the ground of religion. We have them for race. The Abbott government sought to repeal those laws. We fought against that repeal because we believe that there should be antivilification provisions protecting people on the grounds of race, and we equally believe that there should be antivilification provisions protecting people on the grounds of religion. As the Leader of the Opposition says, anyone who remembers—and everyone does—what it was like when an Australian killed tens of people in two mosques in Christchurch could hardly say that we don't need and deserve religious antivilification laws in this country. In my electorate, after that horrible event had occurred, one of our local mosques was vandalised with graffiti referring to that shooter and with right-wing extremist symbols. Religious vilification ought to be against the law at a national level. This bill presents us with an opportunity to establish that antivilification provision. It would be remiss of us not to seek to use the opportunity we have right now to establish antivilification provisions on the ground of religion. I have long supported the need to create protections for people on the ground of religion, for these reasons and for the many other reasons that people have recited tonight. That is why Labor is seeking to move amendments to this bill—those are some of them; there are others—that will not just reduce adverse effects of the bill but make a positive step in the advancement of the civil and political rights of Australians and the protection of people against discrimination on the grounds of sexuality, gender identity, pregnancy, marital status and religion. That is what our amendments seek to do. People from other parties have criticised us for saying that we will pursue these amendments in both the House and the Senate. They want to know why we don't just 'kill the bill' in the House. First, let me say again that I support the concept of religious antidiscrimination provisions, and I think it would be odd for Labor not to support the introduction of ICCPR protections in domestic law. Let me also make a comparison with another achievement of Labor and others in this House against the wishes, frankly, of the government of the day. That's when we introduced the medevac provisions. Deputy Speaker, you will remember as I do how those provisions came to bear. It wasn't from a private member's bill. There's a party in this place that's moved 15 private members' bills in this term, and not a single one of them has even got to a second reading, let alone passed. That's not how laws are made here. What happened was that a government bill was passed in this House. It went to the Senate. In the Senate, amendments were passed allowing for the medical evacuation of refugees to Australia. Then that bill came back to this House, and this House insisted on those amendments, and they were passed. Now, the same people who are criticising us for wanting to use every opportunity we have to amend this bill, to positively and proactively advance the rights of Australians, are the same people—I would wager—who were very pleased they we're able to use a very similar process in order to achieve medevac. That's how medevac was achieved. The bill passed the House and went to the Senate. It was amended in the Senate and came back to the House, where they insisted on the amendments. That is what we are saying we want to do here. We will prosecute our case for these positive amendments to protect Australians in this chamber. Our colleagues from the Senate will do the same in the other place. If we are successful in amending the bill, we will be insisting on those amendments. If that is achieved that will mean protection from discrimination on the ground of religion and protection from vilification on the ground of religion, and an increase in the protection of students who are gender diverse, who are pregnant and who have the different attributes that are currently referred to in the exemption that appears in the Sex Discrimination Act. So for those of my constituents who are contacting me, I want to assure you that I will always do whatever I can to advance the human rights of Australians and protect the human rights of Australians. I will always do that. I will always stand up for vulnerable Australians, especially vulnerable children. I will never cop the idea that it's somehow okay for a school to do what Citipointe College did recently in trying to create some sort of quasi contract precluding kids from expressing themselves in their true and authentic identity. I'll never cop that. In this case, I'm not going to just because minor parties want to use this as some sort of spin opportunity against Labor. I'm not going to forgo opportunities to increase protections for people. I'm going to support—and Labor will support—doing everything we can to improve those protections and to stand up, particularly, for vulnerable Australians, for Australians who are at risk of facing discrimination or vilification. This is the right thing to do, and I encourage every Liberal, National and other person in this chamber to vote on our amendments with us.
Women in Parliament | Statements by Members | House debates
I want to pay tribute to Grace Tame and Brittany Higgins, who've made an extraordinary address in the National Press Club. Their address demonstrated significant integrity and significant...
I want to pay tribute to Grace Tame and Brittany Higgins, who've made an extraordinary address in the National Press Club. Their address demonstrated significant integrity and significant leadership, and this nation owes them a debt of gratitude for the work that they are doing to shine a light on cultural problems; to shine a light on violence, including sexual violence against women; and to shine a light on violence, including sexual violence against children. I was struck by some language from Brittany Higgins when she said, 'If we truly want a gender inclusive society, we need more vocal women in rooms where key decisions are being made to ensure that there is a gender lens placed over national policy.' I agree: I think we need more women in parliament and I think we need more women in government. On that side of the chamber, women are so underrepresented that they only make up about one in five of this coalition in this House. I think that's a real shame because it's a missed opportunity to have more female voices in government. We need more female voices in government because we need government policy, government decision-making, budgets and laws to better respond to the needs, the interests and the aspirations of Australian women. That will only happen once we have more women in politics in this country and everyone who wants to see cultural change, everyone who believes, as I do, that we need to see more women around decision-making tables, everyone who wants to see a better future for people of all genders in this country needs to make sure that in the future we have more women in parliament, we have more women in government. (Time expired)
Griffith Electorate: Schools | Adjournment | House debates
I thank the member for Monash. I certainly appreciate that and I was very pleased to be able to be at the valedictory, if only via video presence.
[by video link] In recent weeks, I've had the pleasure of visiting a number of local schools to present awards. I visited St Laurence's College, a Catholic college following Edmund Rice's vision...
[by video link] In recent weeks, I've had the pleasure of visiting a number of local schools to present awards. I visited St Laurence's College, a Catholic college following Edmund Rice's vision of presence, compassion and liberation by 'acting justly, loving tenderly and walking humbly with God', where I presented the Terri Butler MP Griffith science award to Isaac Lagos. I visited Cannon Hill Anglican College, a school that is located amongst beautiful wetlands and educates in the Anglican tradition, where I presented the Terri Butler MP Griffith science award to Rebecca Leonard. And I visited Cavendish Road State High School, one of the Griffith electorate's largest public schools, which teaches philosophy, has outstanding academic results and focuses on sport and instrumental music academies, where I presented the Terri Butler MP Griffith science award to Isabella 'Izzy' Holland. I'm also lucky enough to be attending some year 6 graduations. Last night, I attended the awards night at Sts Peter and Paul's School, where I presented the Terri Butler MP leadership award to Emma Fraser and Kaitlin Smith. This week, I'll be going to my own daughter's year 6 graduation at one of our local public schools. Let me also take this opportunity to acknowledge the following recipients of my local sponsored awards, most—but not all—of which are in recognition of achievement in science: at Balmoral State High School, Estelle Tonkin-Farr; St Oliver Plunkett Catholic Primary School, Maddy Primrose and Lilly Black; Cannon Hill Anglican College, Primary, Amelia Moss; Loreto College, Andrea Brouwers; Seton College, Gavin Angas-Johnson; San Sisto College, Laurel Harrison; Coorparoo Secondary College, Mirielle Mingoa; Whites Hill State College, Ethan Fegan; Brisbane School of Distance Education, Hillary Earle; Narbethong State Special School, Hannah Fisher; St Joseph's, Grace Bowden; Brisbane South State Secondary College, Hugo Craig; and Somerville House, Annabel Grosser. Annabel has written me a beautiful thankyou letter in which she tells me she hopes to study medicine or science at university and that she wants to use science to help people. Camp Hill State Infants and Primary School have also announced their recipient, and there are a lot of further recipients to come. I'm looking forward to hearing about the recipients of other awards that I've sponsored at East Brisbane State School, Dutton Park State School, Buranda State School, Norman Park State School, Greenslopes State School, Holland Park State School, Coorparoo State School, Seville Road State School, St James Catholic Primary School, Villanova College, Carina State School, Brisbane State High School, Mayfield State School, Mount Gravatt State School, Lourdes Hill College, Cannon Hill State School, Bulimba State School, Seven Hills State School, Morningside State School and San Sisto College. The schools show some of the diversity of education available in our local area, with parents being able to pursue an independent, Catholic or public education. Whichever path is taken, all children should have the opportunities that come with access to a good education. Next year, 2022, will mark 55 years since Gough Whitlam first became leader of the Labor Party, and 2023 will be the 50th anniversary of his Labor government's landmark schools funding laws. One of Gough's enduring legacies was to establish Commonwealth funding for government, Catholic and independent schools, on the basis of need. He said the choice for parents should be 'between systems and philosophies of education, not between standards and opportunities'. In 1983, Bob Hawke said: If all Australian children are to enjoy equal educational opportunities - the funding of all schools - government and non-government - must be based on fairness and need. In the 1980s and 90s, Labor oversaw improved school funding, and a rapid and dramatic increase in high school completions. More recently, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard oversaw significant improvements to support for schools. Today, Labor's national platform restates our commitment to school funding noting that it is 'unacceptable for anyone to miss out on developing that potential because of class, geography, disability or poor quality schooling'. Recently, public school teachers have launched a new campaign for schools funding called Every School, Every Child. Labor is proud to support that campaign. Like parents and teachers around Australia, we want to see more support for public schools. I'm also proud that Labor supports genuine parent choice. Troy and I have chosen wonderful public schools for our children. Genuine choice implies making sure that no one system or school is a poor cousin to any of its counterparts. That means funding for all schools from all sectors. The Liberals, Nationals and Greens have all pursued funding cuts and freezes to schools. I don't support that. I want to see every school a terrific school for our future.
Family Law Amendment (A Step Towards a Safer Family Law System) Bill 2020; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
[by video link] Victims of violence shouldn't bear the legal burden of rebutting the presumption that the abuser should equally share parenting. The best interests of the child, including...
[by video link] Victims of violence shouldn't bear the legal burden of rebutting the presumption that the abuser should equally share parenting. The best interests of the child, including children's interest in being safe from violence, should come first in family law, yet the law as it stands today tells the courts to start with the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. Madam Deputy Speaker Claydon, as you know very well—because you're involved in a parliamentary inquiry in relation to these laws, to which I will refer shortly—this situation has been the subject of criticism both in and outside of this parliament. The Women's Legal Service is calling for the removal of this presumption, and the member for Moreton has introduced this private member's bill, the Family Law Amendment (A Step Towards a Safer Family Law System) Bill 2020, to seek to give effect to that call and to reform these important laws. The Women's Legal Service says that the presumption shifts the focus of the decision-makers, which is the courts, away from children's safety and away from the best interests of children to an emphasis on shared care so that the current system places victims of violence on the back foot in court, in mediation and in their negotiations with the violent perpetrator. The Women's Legal Service further says: The legislation is complicated, easily misunderstood and its links to equal time incentivise violent perpetrators to pursue their "rights" in the court and other processes putting kids at risk. It is also very complex, making trials and legal processes longer and more expensive. Madam Deputy Speaker, as you know, in the 2009 report Time for action, the National Council to Reduce Violence against Women and Their Children pointed out: Under previous (almost identical) legislation, evidence emerged that a very strong pro-contact culture had arisen and that the "the opportunity for a significant relationship with both parents" took precedence over a history or even recent experiences of violence and abuse. That was a report from that council at the time, and that same report said that evidence from the council's own consultations and from the judiciary itself tended to show that such a presumption was inappropriate for a great number of families using the act. In a bipartisan report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs in 2018—which I believe you were the deputy chair of, Madam Deputy Speaker Claydon—the committee said it had: … received considerable evidence that the presumption in the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) of equal shared parental responsibility is leading to unjust outcomes and compromising the safety of children. The committee recommended that: … the Australian Law Reform Commission, as part of its current review of the family law system, develops proposed amendments [to the legislation], and specifically, that it consider removing the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. In its 2019 report on family law, the Australian Law Reform Commission described the language used in the law as 'confusing' and recommended redrafting the relevant provision to refer to a presumption in relation to joint decision-making on major long-term issues to draw a clear distinction between, on the one hand, responsibility, and care and time on the other. They also recommended that the legislation should make it clear that in determining what arrangements for the care of a child would promote the child's best interests, the court must determine on all of the material before it: what is best for the particular child in their particular circumstances. It is really obvious that there will be different views about how children's interests will be best served in family law matters, but I would hope and expect that every member of this House would be of the view that children's safety should be paramount—and that that paramountcy should be clear to all who come into contact with the family law system. Unrepresented parents and others should be under no doubt that a court would, if called upon to adjudicate, seek to discover precisely what is in the best interests of the children concerned. As we are within the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence, it is particularly timely to consider the impact that the design of statutory provisions has on victims and survivors of violence and their children. This is a long-term issue that the Morrison-Joyce government should address, particularly given the bipartisan nature of the House committee report that called for the change. I want to thank the stakeholders who are continuing to press this issue—it is an important one. There should be no position in our law that suggests that people who are victims and survivors of abuse should be forced to rebut a presumption that the abuser, the perpetrator, should have equal rights in relation to the children. It is incredibly important that this matter be dealt with, and I call upon the Morrison-Joyce government to take heed of this private member's bill; to take heed of the views of stakeholders and committees of this parliament; to take heed of the many representations that been made over a very long period of time; and to resolve this situation in the interests of children.
Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. So I would invite her, instead of trying to police the tone in which Labor talks about aged care, to really reflect on the substance of the serious issues that...
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. So I would invite her, instead of trying to police the tone in which Labor talks about aged care, to really reflect on the substance of the serious issues that have been raised through the royal commission. I'm sure she remembers that the royal commission's interim report had a one-word title, and that word was 'neglect'. We all know—everyone in this chamber is well aware—of the importance of aged care to our constituents, in our communities and in the course of our own lives. We also, I think, have all had experience with aged care. I'm certainly grateful to the people who took good care of my grandfather, who was in aged care until he passed away a few years ago. My uncle, who we lost only a couple of weeks ago, was in aged care in the Atherton Tablelands, and I say again to his immediate family how sorry I am for that loss. In my own case, my grandmother is presently in aged care in Far North Queensland. We're grateful to the carers. I've met with so many aged-care workers, carers and nurses—the ones that my family has experienced—and I know how much the carers, nurses, other care staff and support staff in the facilities that are in my electorate and in the facilities all across this country really believe in what they're doing. They're doing this work because it's a vocation. They believe in the importance of caring for elderly Australians. They understand that the people who are in aged care are the people who really built the nation that we have today and who are really in need of good, appropriate, high-quality care. While we can all reflect on the importance of improvements in the aged-care system, of improvements in aged-care regulation and of developing proper responses to the recommendations of the aged-care royal commission, we should also make sure that we are acknowledging that the people working in this system are absolutely doing it because they care. Given some of the conditions, the workload and some of the remuneration conditions that people face, they wouldn't be there if they didn't absolutely believe in what they were doing and really have that vocation where they're drawn to care. I say to all of the carers in our aged-care facilities, and particularly the ones in my electorate, thank you so much for the work that you are doing to look after people. I know that they've had a particularly tough time—they had a tough time during the royal commission and they had a tough time during COVID. I've spoken in the House before about one of the aged-care facilities in my electorate that was given a complete run-around in relation to the supply of vaccines for elderly residents. They were told there would be only a few, then it turned out there were about 45 vaccinations but they had about 90 residents, and then they had to work out who didn't get the chance to have the vaccination that day. It was absolute nonsense that occurred in relation to that facility, and I've covered it in the House before. But all across this electorate and across this country I know that aged-care facilities have had a really difficult time in relation to the vaccination rollout. Of course, it was one of Scott Morrison's two jobs, wasn't it? Scott Morrison as Prime Minister had two jobs—quarantine and the vaccine rollout—and he botched both. We certainly saw some of the consequences of that in aged-care facilities in my electorate, and even more strongly and upsettingly in aged-care facilities elsewhere. It's important that we acknowledge that it has been a difficult time in relation to aged care. It's one of the reasons we so strongly support any action to fix the aged-care system, but it's also why we're concerned that this bill seems to fall short. As is so often the case with the Morrison government, they make big announcements but then they don't deliver. In this case, the situation is one where they have basically fobbed off, delayed or in some cases just outright rejected some of the key recommendations from the aged-care royal commission. Of the 148 recommendations, over half are not being implemented or aren't being implemented properly. This bill is no different, with a number of items missing that came from the original royal commission recommendations it claims to be addressing. It's also really worrying that older Australians, aged-care peak bodies, providers, workers and unions were not consulted in the drafting of the bill that we're talking about today, despite the impacts that it will have on them in the sector. Residential aged-care funding, workforce screening, provider governance, banning orders and the code of conduct are not small changes and they need proper consultation. It's Seniors Month this month, and I'm looking forward to holding a roundtable of stakeholders this coming Friday to talk about issues facing seniors. I expect that issue No. 1 will be aged care and the implementation of the recommendations from the aged-care royal commission. I'm really looking forward to meeting with providers, with stakeholder groups, with senior citizens organisations and with representatives of other seniors groups in my electorate to get their views in relation to the aged-care royal commission, the way that it's been responded to and some of the moves that are included in this bill. I'm looking forward to doing my own consultation, but, of course, we're not the government. It's up to the government to consult on their proposed legislation, and there ought to have been significant consultation in relation to the drafting of this bill. It's disappointing that that has not been the case. In my state, some of the best knowledge and experience in relation to aged care and the aged-care system—I'm sure this is true across the country—comes from the workforce who are at the front line of aged-care facilities, the people who, day in and day out, are managing the workload, are managing the demands, are dealing with people who are sometimes in distress or at least are vulnerable. Some of the best expertise and history comes from the people in that situation. In particular, when it comes to consultation, I have found it very valuable to meet with some of those frontline workers through the agency of the representative organisations—the union movement—whether that's people who are members of the United Workers Union, the Queensland Nurses and Midwives Union or others. There are a range of organisations that have membership amongst people who are working in those frontline occupations and caring for older Australians. I want to give a shout-out to those unions and to say to them, 'Thank you for the work that you are doing.' I have been fortunate to have had delegations from unions—and there are others in aged care, of course—across many years, visiting me to talk to me about the issues that they face in those sectors. I have also been very fortunate to do some work for some of those unions in my previous life as a lawyer. I know, Deputy Speaker Wallace, you were a barrister. You did a lot in the construction sector. I did some work in the construction sector as well, but I will always have a very special place in my heart for the legal work I did for members of those unions who were working in aged-care facilities and who could tell me, through the prism of what was happening in their lives, the direct impact of some of those systemic issues such as workload. I remember talking to someone who was saying to me, 'The facility is physically too big for the limited number of staff we have to get around to make sure'—she was talking about nursing—'there is sufficient support for those residents.' I know that, as I said, the people we're talking to through the agency of their representative organisations and are doing this from a sense of vocation, from a sense of duty and from a sense of responsibility to their community. I want to acknowledge the work those unions are doing. It is the same with the national unions. We've certainly held briefings with union members in parliament. In fact, I think people might remember—I do because I started crying during it—the member for Grayndler's budget reply speech, in which he talked about aged care and aged-care workers. I remember looking up in the gallery, and there was a delegation of aged-care workers, and they were crying. I started crying. I'm sure there were lots of other tears in the House as well, because that's the level of emotion wrapped up in this question of what should be done to improve the aged-care facilities and system in this country. It's the level of emotion because a lot of the workers will tell you they feel like they're at breaking point. They feel like they need to know that they'll have a government that will actually make sure that the residents in their care—the people who we're all actually focused on—get the best possible care and a reasonable level of care. That's really something that I think we should all be able to agree on. Those workers know that the residents in aged care rightly expect that the government will look after them when they're frail, when they're vulnerable in those later years. It's obvious that after eight long years of Liberal-National government in this country, you can't trust the Liberals and Nationals to fix the aged-care system and you can't trust them to deliver good-quality aged care in this country. We all need to see a government that will stand up for older Australians—that will make sure that we have a good, high-quality aged-care system and that people who are vulnerable, particularly, have their interests protected. That's why this bill is really important. I really want to encourage everyone to take a close look at how the Morrison government is responding to the aged-care royal commission. As I said, I've got a number of concerns about the fact that the government is, yet again, falling short when it comes to the implementation of the recommendations. Some are being kicked off, some are being delayed and some are just being outright denied. We actually want to see a strong, sensible and considered approach to aged-care reform, as needed. Most importantly, I think we all want to see an aged-care system that puts residents, older Australians, at the heart of the system—one that's about care, protection and actually making sure that people have dignity towards the end of their lives. That's what I want to see. I really encourage the government to engage with the community, to speak with stakeholders and to consult further in relation to their response to the aged-care royal commission, and I'll really be looking forward to meeting with local stakeholders when I hold a roundtable at the end of this week in relation to issues facing seniors and older Australians, including aged care.
[by video link] I listened closely to the contribution from the previous speaker, the member for Moncrieff. I thought it was really odd that she started off by complaining that Labor are all doom...
[by video link] I listened closely to the contribution from the previous speaker, the member for Moncrieff. I thought it was really odd that she started off by complaining that Labor are all doom and gloom. I think anyone who has been paying attention to the question of aged care, particularly in the context of the royal commission, over the past term of parliament would understand the serious challenges and the reasons why, in fact, Labor have been so concerned about aged care and why we have been so consistent in pressing the government to take real action. The Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021, of course, arises from that royal commission. Like so many of the things that this government does, this bill seems to just fall short. That's the case with the government's actions generally and it's the case with the government's actions in relation to aged care. So I'd say to the member for Moncrieff: instead of trying to police the tone in which Labor is talking about aged care, perhaps take on board some of the criticisms—
Griffith Electorate: Greenslopes Red Cross Hall | Constituency Statements | House debates
[by video link] In August, a batch of documents was released about the Commonwealth-owned former Red Cross Hall site. Those documents show that the Liberal National government has, throughout...
[by video link] In August, a batch of documents was released about the Commonwealth-owned former Red Cross Hall site. Those documents show that the Liberal National government has, throughout their entire eight long years in office, ignored calls to act on dangers posed by asbestos, lead paint and pesticides. When the Red Cross let the premises in 2013, site contamination reports told the government of significant asbestos, lead and pesticide risks. In March 2014, the then veterans' affairs minister told the finance minister that the site should be remediated to remove the contamination but his department did not have capacity to fund the remediation. Instead of providing the funding, the then finance minister responded that the site should not be remediated until the government decided on its future. Seemingly oblivious to the zoning, he wanted the site to be sold for residential or commercial development. So, instead of remediating the site, the government put up fences and signs. They're still there. In February 2015, Asbestos Audits Queensland said that the roof was in an advanced state of deterioration after recent hailstorms and should be removed and replaced. This advice appears to have been completely ignored. In March 2015, the government claimed they were working towards remediation as quickly as possible. The following month, though, they were 'unable to indicate' how long it would take. In 2017—three years after the government had decided to go ahead and sell the site on the open market without remediating it first—they changed their mind. Instead, they would make a private sale to a preferred purchaser. In August 2017, the government again said they had not started remediating. In 2019, there was a new asbestos audit. Five years had passed since the last one, even though it had recommended annual audits. The report said: 'The two buildings have been left to deteriorate since our last inspection in 2015 and asbestos contamination from the roof cladding has spread across the site and built up in various areas. It is no longer a matter of simply resealing the roof cladding. The entire site requires remediation and the roof cladding removed, including cleaning of all support beams, ceiling and roof spaces et cetera and the clean-up and removal of the top layer of soil in grounds of the site carried out.' Now, the newly-released documents show, remediation has still not started. Meanwhile, the government's proposal for the site has been deemed a controlled action by the environment minister, which commences an assessment and approval process that will take significant time. I have written to the veterans' affairs minister three times since the documents were released in August. I am still waiting for a response. My community deserves an explanation and we deserve to know what the Morrison government intends to do to remedy its long-running neglect of this historical site. It's an absolute disgrace and it needs to be fixed. The government needs to get its act together. It has been eight years, and they've been dithering on it, putting people at risk and wasting a crucial piece of community infrastructure.
Airport Noise | Statements by Members | House debates
[by video link] This morning the Petitions Committee tabled a petition, circulated in Brisbane, calling on the House to free Airservices Australia from regulatory capture and also to review...
[by video link] This morning the Petitions Committee tabled a petition, circulated in Brisbane, calling on the House to free Airservices Australia from regulatory capture and also to review Malcolm Turnbull's 2007 decision to approve the new Brisbane runway. For the whole of my time as an MP, aircraft noise has been an issue for many locals. Since mid-2020 an additional cohort of locals has been affected with the opening of the new runway at Brisbane Airport. As the local member, I will not be advocating for any changes that leave any locals worse off. There are a number of things the Morrison-Joyce government should do in the interests of everyone in Brisbane. Firstly, locals have felt blindsided, and they've got a lot of questions. The Morrison-Joyce government should hold a public meeting involving the relevant regulators, the Brisbane Airport Corporation and a representative from the government to answer questions and avoid any buck-passing. The government should also establish a strong, independent, permanent airport community forum for Brisbane residents. We need supervision from a well-informed body that is free from regulatory capture. The government should respond in plain English to the suggestions for noise mitigation advanced by the local community, including suggestions in the petition tabled today. The government should make sure noise monitoring is improved so the community has an accurate measure of noise in all of the affected areas. This is a really important issue for my constituents.
Sex Discrimination Legislation | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Why has the Prime Minister failed Australian women and voted against Labor's amendments to implement key recommendations by Sex Discrimination Commissioner...
My question is to the Prime Minister. Why has the Prime Minister failed Australian women and voted against Labor's amendments to implement key recommendations by Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins in the Respect@Work report?
Sex Discrimination and Fair Work (Respect at Work) Amendment Bill 2021; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.
COVID-19: Morrison Government | Adjournment | House debates
I commend the member for Curtin on the contribution. The Prime Minister had two jobs this year: a speedy, effective rollout of the vaccine, and quarantine. He has botched both, and now...
I commend the member for Curtin on the contribution. The Prime Minister had two jobs this year: a speedy, effective rollout of the vaccine, and quarantine. He has botched both, and now Australians are paying the price. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister has been trying to strongarm the states to inflict his own inadequacies on them, even scornfully comparing Queenslanders and others to cavemen in a kids' cartoon. If he is looking for cavemen or looking for someone to scold, he should look behind him instead at people like the member for Dawson. Eighteen months into the pandemic, we are seeing the consequences of the Morrison government's failures. They have not delivered effective national quarantine. The vaccine rollout has been shambolic. Mr Morrison, the Prime Minister, said that Australia was at the front of the queue, but when it became clear that we were at the back of the queue he changed his mind and said, 'This isn't a race.' He's wrong. This is a race. And because of his failures we ended up with half the country in lockdown. Australians are paying the price for the Prime Minister's failures. Not content with botching his own two jobs, the Prime Minister has also been seeking to inflict his inadequacies on state and territory leaders. He pressured the New South Wales Premier to avoid lockdown, and now New South Wales is seeing the consequences. He and his ministers, including the Minister for Defence, have lectured and hectored the Queensland Premier. Thank goodness she stood up to them and did not give into their attempts to undermine our state borders. He sided with the likes of Senator Pauline Hanson in demanding that Queensland open its borders. He joined with Clive Palmer in taking Western Australia to the High Court, in an attempt to ram a hole in their state border. And the Prime Minister has even compared Queenslanders and others to cavemen in the kids cartoon movie The Croods. He thinks we need to come out from our cave. It's bizarre. The Betoota Advocate reported on these comments, with headlines like '"Funny looking cave", says Perth man enjoying a beer at the pub before a movie with mates', and 'Brisbane man pops out of his cave to hunt for some yum cha in a busy shopping precinct'. I thought of these headlines at the weekend, when I attended a beautiful church service to commission the new priest in charge, Reverend Cooper, at St John's at Bulimba. I thought about them, too, when I went to my son's under-9½'s footy game. And I certainly thought 'funny looking cave' when I was at BrewDog at Murarrie having some beers with my family to celebrate my mum's birthday. The states have been following the health advice and doing their best to pick up the slack where the Morrison government has failed. I'm thankful to live in a state where the Premier has resisted the Morrison government's attempts to badger and strongarm her to weaken the COVID response. And I fervently hope that people in every state and territory will soon be able to be in churches and at kids sport and in pubs, while still being confident that their government is following health advice and standing firm against pressure to weaken the response. We're not in a cave. We're not in a cartoon. We're in a pandemic, and serious times call for serious leadership. As I said, if the Prime Minister is looking for cavemen or for people to scold, he should look behind him. How about the member for Dawson, who has spread disinformation using this parliament? In this parliament he has described quarantine as imprisonment. He has claimed antilockdown protesters were taking a stand against tyranny. He has demanded no more state border closures. He has opposed QR codes and check-ins. He has said, 'Masks do not work—fact.' He has claimed lockdowns do more harm than good. He has attacked chief health officers, claiming, 'There is no doubt that the power has gone to their heads.' This isn't some crossbencher or a minor-party person; this is a Morrison government MP. Yet what have we heard from the Prime Minister, the man so ready and willing to rebuke our premier in Queensland? We have heard crickets in respect of it. When Labor moved a motion about the member for Dawson's disinformation, the Prime Minister couldn't even bring himself to refer to the member directly. That's the character of this Prime Minister. He won't lift a finger to stop the member for Dawson and others from undermining the public health response. My constituents are doing their absolute best. They are observing restrictions, including lockdowns when necessary. They are quarantining when necessary. They deserve a federal government that will act swiftly and effectively to keep them safe and well. The state government is doing its part, but the Prime Minister has botched the vaccine rollout and has failed to deliver safe national quarantine. He should focus on getting the federal response right, pulling MPs in line if they spread disinformation and working with the states—not having a go at them and calling them 'cavemen'.
JobKeeper Payment | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Why didn't the government put rules in place to require that JobKeeper payments to profitable companies with rising revenue be returned to the taxpayer? The...
My question is to the Prime Minister. Why didn't the government put rules in place to require that JobKeeper payments to profitable companies with rising revenue be returned to the taxpayer? The government makes welfare recipients and parents who receive the childcare subsidy return excess payments. Why weren't the same rules put in place for profitable companies with rising revenue?