Emma Husar's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
National Disability Insurance Scheme | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Children with a disability are waiting months to receive an NDIS plan and the support that they need, with the government's own figures showing an average...
My question is to the Prime Minister. Children with a disability are waiting months to receive an NDIS plan and the support that they need, with the government's own figures showing an average wait time of 15 weeks. Adults are also waiting on specialist accommodation to be included in their plans so they can live independently. When will the government join with Labor to get rid of the NDIS staffing cap so people with a disability can get the support they need in a reasonable time frame?
Lindsay Electorate: Pensions and Benefits | Constituency Statements | House debates
I would rather be using this three minutes to wish everybody in my community a really happy Christmas and to thank all of the Parliament House staff—the clerks, the drivers, the security...
I would rather be using this three minutes to wish everybody in my community a really happy Christmas and to thank all of the Parliament House staff—the clerks, the drivers, the security officers—who support us here in our jobs every day. But the reality is that two people I know of in my electorate have, in the last 24 hours, had their Christmas spirit severely dampened by this cruel and out-of-touch government. I rise today to talk about an issue for a carer in my electorate, Christie Green. Christie is a single mum to four beautiful kids: Tristan, Tyrone, Scarlett Rose and Carlito. All of these children have special needs. All of them have had lives of struggle. Tristan is now 16 and is supported by his mum. He has level 2 autism, ADHD, severe depression, anxiety and other behavioural issues. With four kids with special needs, it is not a surprise that Christie is supported by Centrelink payments that are designed to help families in her position. Yesterday she learnt that her carer payment had been cancelled. That's fine; we can get it back online. But Centrelink have told her that this government's instructions are to make her wait six to nine months to get her carer payment restored. We are coming into the festive season. I urge Minister Fletcher and this government, who are completely out of touch when it comes to special needs families, to do something about it. As if that were not cruel enough, Lachlan Bell, the son of another constituent in my community, Renee Bell, has a DSM5 diagnosis of level 3 autism. He has social communication issues. He has type 1 diabetes and epilepsy. He's non-verbal and totally incontinent. This morning Renee woke up to the news that her son's NDIS package has been slashed by 70 per cent. His diagnosis and his needs have not changed by 70 per cent in just 12 months, and it is an absolute disgrace that Renee is coming into Christmas with the uncertainty of what funds will be available to help her support her child. Renee is also a single mum. She has two other children. Olivia also has a diagnosis, and her funding claim is also about to be reassessed. This is nothing but out-of-touch cost savings by a very cruel, out-of-touch government, and I would urge Minister Fletcher and his assistant minister, Sarah Henderson, to ensure that this is fixed before Christmas and that their office and their departments are doing their jobs. I am sick and tired of rising on my feet week after week in this place, dealing with these same issues. This is not a one-off; this is, unfortunately, a pattern. It is a pattern of behaviour that the government will be happy to continue to repeat for families like Christie's and Renee's. I have absolutely no doubt that this Prime Minister will rock up somewhere on Christmas Day with a fancy hat and serve meals to those people he is absolutely disadvantaging—people like Christie and Renee, who will probably have to turn up to these things in order to put food on their family's table. It is cruel and out of touch.
Too often during the last six months I've had to bite my tongue and not defend myself publicly whilst being misrepresented. I will not wait around for someone else to do what is right and show...
Too often during the last six months I've had to bite my tongue and not defend myself publicly whilst being misrepresented. I will not wait around for someone else to do what is right and show leadership. There are two sides to every story. Now it is my time to correct the record, be my own champion and the battler that I've always been in pursuit of what is right and fair. I do not object to the media doing their jobs, but misrepresenting members is not one of them. I respect those who have shown ethical and good conduct while reporting. Let me be very specific. At 9.33 am on 2 August, Ms Alice Workman of BuzzFeed published the most damaging article. In it she claimed that she had requested my comment. She had not. This is false. At 9.34 am on that same day, one minute after that publication, she emailed me requesting comments and answers to 48 questions for the article that she had already published. I had no chance to refute or respond. At 9.35 am she further tweeted that I had bragged about who I was having sex with, that I had sexually harassed an employee and intentionally exposed myself, like Sharon Stone's character in Basic Instinct,in front of a colleague and his infant son. As a result of this initial misrepresentation, over 225 articles were re-published, each and every single one of them misrepresenting me in so many respects. Within 36 hours of this gross misrepresentation and the slut-shaming smears going viral, I was asked to resign as the member for Lindsay. Let me correct the record. BuzzFeed and Alice Workman knew that the confidential letter which contained untested and contested allegations was in their possession. They also knew that I was bound by confidentiality under the Whelan process I was being examined by. But they went ahead and published their slut-shaming story knowing and with full intent that it would go viral. Let me correct the record: They didn't give me any notice in advance. They didn't give me the opportunity to seek release from my confidentiality obligations so that I could respond. They didn't give me the opportunity to use our legal system to preserve the confidential process until it had properly played out. In furtherance of my correcting that record today, I have launched proceedings for defamation in the Federal Court against BuzzFeed and Alice Workman, who were involved in this shameless misrepresentation and subsequent take-down. Sunlight is always the best disinfectant, and today I bathe those misrepresentations in a flood of light, to remind them that they are not above the rule of law in this great country of ours. Mr Speaker, I am not a bully. I am not Sharon Stone. I am not a thief and I did not deliberately misuse my work expenses. I will fight for my integrity, for my family and for Lindsay, which is full of battlers just like me, and I will fight for every woman who comes after me. I'm going to do my bit to ensure that this never happens again.
Most grievously and on many occasions.
I seek leave to make a personal explanation.
Fair Work Amendment (Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Bill 2018; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It's a pleasure to rise in this House and to speak. It's always an honour, but it's such a privilege today when I have a school from my local community sitting up in the gallery watching me give...
It's a pleasure to rise in this House and to speak. It's always an honour, but it's such a privilege today when I have a school from my local community sitting up in the gallery watching me give this speech. My only hope is that the improvements we're able to make here for these year 6 students are not things that we're still talking about 20 years from now. The irony of giving this speech on this particular amendment to the Fair Work Amendment (Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Bill 2018 is not lost on me, and giving it on day No. 5 during the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence is also a poignant reminder of why we still need this and the 16 days of activism. For too long impunity, silence and stigma have allowed violence against women to escalate to pandemic proportions. One in three women worldwide experience gender based violence. The time for change is here and now. In recent years, the voices worldwide of survivors and of activists through campaigns such as Me Too, Time's Up, Ni Una Menos, 'Not one more Niki', Balance Ton Porc and others have reached a crescendo that can no longer be silenced anymore. Advocates understand that while the names and contexts may differ across geographic locations, women and girls everywhere are experiencing extensive abuse and their stories need to be brought to light. Having to stand here and advocate for this change to our National Employment Standards is heartbreaking. When we know better, we do better. I don't want to be here for discussions anymore. I'm tired of the talk; it is cheap and it's time to make the change necessary. This is what I signed up for: the opportunity to make our country better and to give a voice to those who don't have one or who have temporarily lost the courage to use their own. I'm here to make that change—the change we have long been fighting for and the change that can save a woman's life right now. We have the opportunity to create the legislation that will change those lives. It won't help those 63 women who have already been murdered at the hands of a partner or a male this year. We know that more than one woman a week is dying at the hands of a current or former partner, a person they once loved and trusted. The bill we're arguing about can save lives, and it's a serious matter, not to be trivialised by devaluing arguments such as, 'It's going to impinge on business,' or, 'It'll stop people getting employed because they'll be discriminated against,' or trying to say that unpaid leave is the same thing as paid leave. The government has proposed an amendment to the National Employment Standards to provide all employees with unpaid leave. It doesn't touch the sides of what's actually needed. Victims have been heard; frontline workers' expertise has been recognised; and business, unions and organisations that deal with domestic violence each day have been recognised. Their message is clear: people who have experienced domestic violence need more support in their workplaces. That goes for all workplaces, in all industries and all sectors, whether that's here in the parliament, in a cafe or at the bank. It has taken this government a long time to drag its feet even to where we are now to join this important discussion. But—credit where credit is due—I welcome them to the floor to debate it. We've moved them from complete and utter opposition into something that they consider themselves to be happy with now. They have slow-turning wheels, it seems though, and are too busy now talking about themselves as opposed to talking about the rest of the country and those who need paid leave when they exit a violent home. They made their big announcement to support unpaid leave back in March, and here we are in November—the peak time for violence in families—one week after the bill was finally introduced. I just want to repeat that this is actually a life-and-death issue that we're standing here to debate. In those eight months, while we waited, 40 women and their children have died. If we were speaking about terrorism—which I don't doubt is equally important—would the government be dragged kicking and screaming to this reform? But they're still only halfway there, and I will not stand here and support a bill that is half-cocked. It is 10 days paid leave or just get out of the way. The lives of Australia's women are at stake. Earlier this week, I rose in this place to move a motion on the UN day for the elimination of gendered violence, and I'm proud to rise in support of a campaign to end violence against women and girls. I shared my own personal story in this place two years ago in the hope that women and girls throughout Australia would know the strength and resilience you can have after the violence ends, and that anyone, no matter where they come from or their achievements in life, can have their life interrupted by violence perpetrated against them. Taking the first step and removing yourself and your family from a domestic violence situation takes a great deal of courage. Logistically, it takes much more. There is so much you need to do, and you can't achieve much in five days unpaid leave after you have finally escaped from a frightening situation. How can you care for your children, find a new safe home, visit the local police station, attend court for an AVO, move kids to schools, get them into support, attend appointments with doctors, counsellors, psychologists—wherever you need to go? Five days unpaid leave will not support all of that. In March 2018, the Fair Work Commission agreed to insert a clause into modern awards to provide for five days unpaid family and domestic violence leave. When this decision finally came into effect in August, two million award-reliant workers became entitled to unpaid leave. But, again, what use is unpaid leave when you need finances, you need security and you need the ability to go on as normal, or as close to normal as possible, in your day-to-day life? I speak about sliding doors wedged open by crisis points, and we as a nation are at a crisis point. Domestic violence is a major factor in deaths in Australia. Last year, Sherele Moody won a Walkley Award for her brave coverage of domestic violence issues in Australia. She spoke of the 39 per cent of murders that were attributed to current or former partners or family members in one year alone. That's 39 per cent, a huge number, yet we're in here squabbling over giving people access to paid or unpaid leave. We also know the most dangerous place for a woman is in the company of her partner at home on a Saturday night, yet we have to fight to give women financial and job security during a crisis. I wonder: what more it will take? Our nation wants change. People are consuming the media around domestic violence and are clearly now standing up saying, 'This is not okay.' What is lacking is the will in this place, on the other side, to do something about it. This year's Gold Walkley went to the podcast The Teacher's Pet. It was a true crime investigation series that gripped the nation in horror that a husband was able to get away with murdering his wife. As it was set in the 1980s, you would think we might have learned something from that devastation, but we continue to allow this to grip our country, and the statistics just continue to increase. We continue to be horrified at every report and every incident. The government need to take a good hard look at themselves and this shameful suggestion of a bill. Could those opposite find suitable accommodation for their children in five days? The women in my electorate certainly can't. The women that I speak to each day, who come in for support, who come in for referrals and who come in for help, certainly cannot do that. In a fragile mental state, fearing for the safety of herself and her children, a woman will often reach this sliding-door moment very quickly. Maybe one incident escalated too far—sexual, physical, emotional or financial abuse tipped over. We know that violence against women in their home denies them and their children security and safety and destroys the foundation of their identity. At this sliding door, a woman will potentially have isolated herself in shame, reducing her sense of belonging and connection to her family, friends and community. Emotionally completely damaged, a DV survivor may not have the visible scars, but there are certainly open wounds just below the surface that need the time to heal. Women who experienced abuse during childhood are 1.5 times more likely to experience all kinds of violence during adult life. For some, the workplace is their respite from home and, for some women, their workplace is their support mechanism. Their colleagues, sometimes their employer, may be the most important support they have in these situations. This moment is our government's sliding-door moment. They have opened it, they have peeked in and they have thrown women experiencing domestic violence a few bones. But that's not enough; we need the full 10 days of paid leave. Labor has committed to doubling that number provided by the government. It is an appropriate time to be highlighting the necessity for real DV leave. It's not groundbreaking, and this is just the point. There is precedence from more empathetic governments around the world. Other jurisdictions have introduced paid DV leave, and Labor believes that Australia's federal workplace system should also, importantly, provide this leave. The member for Sydney just talked about the statistics in Australia. Every Liberal state government in this country has now moved to allow for paid DV leave for their government workers. In July this year, the New Zealand government legislated paid family and domestic violence leave, guaranteeing 10 days paid leave for all workers who are experiencing violence and who need to escape. Many employers already also provide paid family and domestic violence leave to their workforce through their own enterprise agreements. More than 1,000 enterprise agreements approved under the Fair Work Act between 1 January 2016 and 30 June 2017 provide 10 or more days of paid DV and family leave. These companies include leaders in this space such as Carlton and United Breweries, Telstra, NAB, Virgin, IKEA, Qantas and Aldi. These employers and many others have paved the way and helped reduce the stigma that often accompanies DV. So too have Australia's unions campaigning for paid DV and family leave over many years, negotiating leave coverage in Australian workplaces. I would like to give a special mention to Sam Parker, a frontline worker in my electorate from the ASU who recently won an award to recognise her commitment and longstanding advocacy for the clients that she works on behalf of in my community of Lindsay. We do not anticipate that there would be a significant uptake of 10 days paid leave, unlike the slurs that this bill is sometimes reduced to by those on the other side saying that people will somehow fake being in a situation just to get access to this leave. It's hardly a credible argument when most people who are actually in it wouldn't even own up to it or want to be in it. It's crucial that this leave is available for the women who need it. The economic impact of domestic violence is significant and affects every single person in this country. It is estimated at a cost of $22 billion each and every year. There is an absolute financial business case, if not a moral imperative from an empathetic and compassionate country standpoint. A study by the Australian Institute found that the cost would be almost completely offset by the benefits to the employer, not limited to a reduction in turnover and higher productivity. Let's keep it in perspective: the cost is 5c per day, per worker to institute this into our agreements. We have already reached a national crisis point. I'm not quite sure why parliaments around this country are not being convened for special sittings to deal with the epidemic that we face. How many more women and children must have their lives interrupted before this epidemic is addressed in a substantive and meaningful way? It has never been tolerable to allow this crisis to continue. We are a smart nation. We already know what needs to be done. What we don't have is the political will on the other side, the understanding or the desire to fix a problem facing half the nation's population, that being our women. We have leaders who are men in parliaments. Most of our parliaments still, sadly, are predominantly filled with men, who statistically are not likely to have been on the receiving end of family or domestic violence. If you haven't experienced it, it can be hard to understand it. We know what needs to be done. Our experts and our communities tell us. The list is short, it's simple and it's common sense. It's time to fund women's crisis centres so when it's time to leave there is somewhere for women to go. It's time to support women through legal services and proper family court systems so when a woman does leave she isn't facing a flawed system. It's time to eliminate current behaviours that enable violence against women through education and through supportive programs that shift attitudes to create a society rooted in equality. It's time to ensure that men who are perpetrators are held to account by treating it as a criminal offence. No longer is it a private matter. It's time to give women access to this paid leave so when a woman does leave she can continue her employment and know that her job is secure. Unpaid leave and access to her own super does nothing to support a woman who needs to go. It's time to end the gendered slurs in our workplaces and in our senior roles, and the use of them as a way to bring smart, clever, capable women undone. White Ribbon Australia's vision is that Australia is a nation that respects all women and a nation in which every woman is able to live in safety, free from all forms of men's abuse. Along with the UN 16 Days of Activism and Our Watch, we already have the tools we need to start addressing this. This is just one part. It's time this was a national priority of all levels of government. It's costing women their lives, many their future, and costing our nation $22 billion each year. It is time.
Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee; Report | Committees | House debates
It's always interesting to follow the minister who was responsible for this area when he talks about and acknowledges the problems in regional and remote parts of this country. I acknowledge his...
It's always interesting to follow the minister who was responsible for this area when he talks about and acknowledges the problems in regional and remote parts of this country. I acknowledge his presence here now and also challenge the member for Lyne particularly on what he's actually doing, given his knowledge of how tricky the situation is in those remote and regional areas, in terms of funding and supporting those families that are subject to having their children removed. I'd like to thank the member for Macarthur, who spoke before the member for Lyne, and the member for Newcastle, who I had the pleasure—if I can call it that—of sitting on this committee with, and the secretary and all of those who supported the work that we did. More than that, I'd also like to thank those people who gave evidence to our committee. These things and these issues are never easily spoken of. Such knowledge and expertise from those witnesses who were allowed to attend was beneficial to our committee. I rise now to speak against this report, Breaking barriers: a national adoption framework for Australian children, which is the national adoption framework for Australian children. Like my colleagues, I'm horrified by the recommendations by this government to return to the blight on our nation: the years of the stolen generation. Between 1910 and 1970, many Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families as a result of various government policies and practices. The generations of children removed under these policies became known as the stolen generation. These policies of child removal left a legacy of trauma and loss that continues to this day to affect Indigenous communities, their families and individuals. What this government is proposing harks back to that time. Earlier this year, in this very place, we commemorated the official acknowledgement. It'd been 10 years since the then Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said sorry on behalf of all Australians past and present. The journey to a national apology began with the 1997 Bringing them home report, with recommendation 5a of the report stating: That all Australian Parliaments … officially acknowledge the responsibility of their predecessors for the laws, policies and practices of forcible removal … On 13 February 2008, then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made a formal apology on behalf of the Australian parliament to the Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This apology was particularly poignant to the stolen generations. Is this government's memory so short that they cannot recall this important moment in time? Have they forgotten the stories that were shared? Just one month after we hosted the sorry anniversary event, then Assistant Minister for Children and Families, the member for Lyne, David Gillespie, suggested that adoptions for more Indigenous children should be an option. I don't know about you, but this makes me incredibly angry. It makes me sick and hammers home the clear fact that this government does not learn from past mistakes. The deplorable call of the recommendations in Breaking barriers report is to encourage open adoption for children in out-of-home care. This is a policy that will have a mammoth impact on First Nations communities, given that their children are 10 times more likely to be in out-of-home care. Indigenous children, throughout Australia, remain very significantly overrepresented in care and in contact with welfare authorities. Their overrepresentation increases as the intervention becomes more coercive, with the greatest overrepresentation being in out-of-home care. This cannot go on, and it cannot be left as if there is not a direct correlation between the past malpractices and mistreatment of First Nations people and what is happening in current, modern-day Australia. Indigenous children are particularly overrepresented in long-term foster care arrangements, and a high percentage of Indigenous children in long-term foster care live with non-Indigenous carers. Indigenous children are more likely than non-Indigenous children to be removed on the ground of neglect, as opposed to abuse. This policy and this government are leading our national down a horrible, horrible path. They are suggesting that we recreate one of the worst parts of our national story. They are asking us to agree, as a nation, to have another stolen generation. There has been absolutely no regard for the evidence-based child placement principles. The government are instead opting for the harsh, interventionist policies proposed by this government in the Breaking barriers report. I will not stand by and let this disregard, disrespect and disgusting determination of our First Nations children and their future continue to be proposed by this government. They are proposing open adoption as their policy. They are also suggesting that we jump over the guardianship process and go straight into an open adoption. Open adoption is only slightly less cruel than forced adoption. The child is supposed to be raised with an understanding of their past and a connection to their biological family. Research, though, has shown that, despite the best of intentions, open adoption does not work how it is planned. I have struggled to find a person on either side of the open adoption process who can actually confirm to me that it works. So what would it look like? The adoptive parents and birth parents would have agreed that they will stay in touch, share the milestones of their child's life and provide access to the child so that a deep connection to self can occur. The part where it falls apart is in keeping the promise. Author Amy Seek published a book called God and Jetfire to tell stories of birth families. Majorly, the open adoptions have failed many of the birth mothers she has spoken with over the years. She writes: The adoptive parents may have pulled out, reneged on stated or implied promises, often claiming that, as the child grew old enough to grasp the deep ambiguity of the arrangement, ongoing contact became confusing. Sometimes birthparents draw back. Sometimes adoptive parents appear to get jealous. In most states, the law offers no protection for what is usually a non-binding, voluntary agreement. I'm disgusted, but I'm unsurprised that the centre of this government's national child protection system would be open adoption. It is the heartless recommendation that they attempt to package as an empathetic solution to a very complex issue. Leading practitioners, organisations and NGOs have come out against the Breaking barriers report. It is our responsibility—ours alone, as representatives of this nation and, importantly, at this very moment, as representatives of the First Nations people—to stand up against this revolving suggestion of a social policy. We know from history and from expert advice that this does not work. Indigenous people need to look after their own children. They need to sustain their culture, the oldest living, continuing culture in the world. This government is proposing yet another so-called social policy that would put a nail in that coffin. We hear the word 'self-determination' as a core value of social policy and the agencies involved. Please allow me to read from a 20-year-old report, the same report that helped lead to the national apology taking place, the Bringing them home report. I had to point out to two of my colleagues on this inquiry that it actually even existed. The report said: In spite of this, Indigenous children continue to be removed from their families at a disproportionate rate and continue to be placed into non-Indigenous environments including group homes and foster families. I have spoken about the impact on our First Nations people and on their parents, but what about the most important people in this complex situation—the children? The child is at risk of many negative impacts, including reduced ability to assimilate into family, a sense of rejection, poor peer communications, power struggles and identity confusion. This does not sound like we are acting in our children's best interests. I am for child protection, I am for doing what is in the best interests of the children and I am always willing and able to stand up and fight for those people without a voice. This, however, does not go anywhere near what needs to happen. The United Nations Children's Fund also gives us some guiding principles around the rights of a child in its Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which states that: Forced integration is a breach of— the child's— rights and the Committee has recommended that States with significant indigenous populations adopt enforceable legislation to protect their rights. The recommendations contained in this report do the exact opposite. The solution is something that this government is continuing to skirt. The solution is to invest in addressing the issues of family breakdowns and to support our Indigenous families to raise their children in safe, appropriate manners. We must consult with our First Nations communities, though, and this was something that the committee was absolutely starved of. Many witnesses who wanted to appear were not able to, and there were a number of people who would have come along to give evidence to our committee, had they been allowed. We need genuine partnership with our First Nations, our First Nations communities and our First Nations leaders, not interventionist strategies version 2.0, or wherever we're up to—because I am sick of counting. There is a reason why we need to continue to close the gap. This is not going to be helpful. We must comply with the principles for stability and permanency planning and we must only suggest permanent care once the family has been provided with culturally appropriate and intensive family support services, which is what is missing. I implore the minister to take up my first suggestion, which is to actually fund these communities, not continue to defund them. The guiding principles that we on this side have prepared should underpin any national adoption framework. No child should be left without a real connection to their birth family, now or into the future. I urge this government to stop, to collaborate with us on this, and to actually listen to our First Nations people on the best way forward and on their self-determination.
Centenary of Armistice | Statements by Members | House debates
It was my great honour to attend the 100th anniversary of Armistice in the electorate of Lindsay on Remembrance Day. The event in my electorate was organised by the Penrith CBD Corporation in...
It was my great honour to attend the 100th anniversary of Armistice in the electorate of Lindsay on Remembrance Day. The event in my electorate was organised by the Penrith CBD Corporation in collaboration with the City of Penrith, St Marys and Glenbrook RSL sub-branches. I praise the CEO of Penrith CBD Corporation, Gay Hawthorne, for bringing the three branches together for this very special event. Ron Blakely, John Wakefield and Mick McConnell, the presidents of all three of those branches—I can't imagine what it was like to come together as three RSLs to do that—pulled off a significant and very memorable event. It's been my absolute pleasure to support the committee through the $50,000 grant that we were able to secure from the federal government to ensure that our community had access to such a significant commemoration. It is fitting to acknowledge the struggles that we face towards reconciling our past on such days as Remembrance Day. I was able to give a speech that day and acknowledged, also, the 1,200 Aboriginal men who served in the First World War. It was the first time in their lives that they were treated as equals among their non-Indigenous peers. Sometimes we forget that we had First Nations people serving, and Reg Saunders, who lived next door to Penrith in St Marys, was the first Indigenous soldier to become a commissioned officer in the Australian Army. There are 42 wars active today, and in 2018 127,337 lives have been lost. On 11 November 2018, we made a promise that we will remember, and we will.
Volunteering | Private Members' Business | House debates
I follow the member for Macarthur in thanking the wonderful volunteers in his community. I'd also like to thank the member for Bonner, who brought this volunteer motion forward. I rise very...
I follow the member for Macarthur in thanking the wonderful volunteers in his community. I'd also like to thank the member for Bonner, who brought this volunteer motion forward. I rise very proudly today in this House to pay tribute to some of the tireless volunteers in my electorate of Lindsay, which I'm so privileged to represent. Lindsay is an exceptional part of the world. Over 20,000 people in my electorate volunteer. From sporting clubs and service groups to school canteens and reading groups, we have it all—and lots and lots of it. It's that special glue, that magical glue, that makes a place a home and fills you with a sense of purpose and belonging. Volunteering is part of the fabric of Australia. We get in, give a hand and get it done. Research has also shown that volunteering is a two-way relationship. The OECD Better Life Index found that volunteers enjoyed life more due to the sense of satisfaction that comes from interaction, goal setting, achievement and learning new things. Giving makes you happy. There is scientific research to prove it. People who give time or money are 42 per cent happier than those who do not. I love the term prosocial behaviour. It's often the crux of volunteerism. There are a number of organisations in Lindsay, like the Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce. They have recently been given new life thanks to the outgoing president, Wayne Willmington, and his board. I'd like to personally thank Wayne and the team at Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce for their generous support of our business community. I would also like to congratulate the incoming board, made up of Simon Gould, Anil Puri and Mary Donnelly—big shoes to fill, but I know you're up for the challenge. On Melbourne Cup Day, I was thrilled to attend the fundraising breakfast for the Penrith Community Kitchen, organised by Julie Lonard from the Nepean Business Network. This amazing event almost raised $40,000 to keep one of the volunteering institutions of Lindsay pumping out over 2,000 meals for the homeless every single week. This is no mean feat from either of the organisations involved, and I'm so filled with pride for both of these organisations. They are both organised and supported by volunteers, and both will be seen into the future by volunteers. Last week I was thrilled to be able to secure and distribute some federal grants for some of the wonderful local volunteer groups in my community. The Luke Priddis Foundation, which supports children with autism and their volunteers and therapists, will now have a new kitchen to teach kids life skills thanks to the grant we were able to secure. Paying it Forward is a charity that I have personally volunteered with for many, many years, headed up by Gen and Rob Jagt, the founders of this charity. It was my pleasure to help them fund a vehicle which will enable them to continue to expand on their support for the most socially marginalised through delivery of goods and services using their new wheels. We also have the Nepean Food Services in my electorate, possibly the largest volunteer organisation, who now have a new family table to share many delicious and happy meals from. They provide countless meals to older people in our community and also those who are on the fringes. I want to say a massive thank you to Nepean Food Services for all that they do and thank every single one of the volunteers I've been proud to interact with over the last three years. Mama Lana's Community Foundation, who was recognised as New South Wales Volunteer of the Year in 2017 for her work in my electorate helping to feed the homeless and vulnerable, has received a commercial-grade fridge and freezer, allowing them to increase the ability to accept donations and keep them fresher for longer. Thank you to Lana and Roger Borg, the founders of Mama Lana's Community Foundation. Nepean Multicultural Access requested and received computers to help provide training and program access for new Australians and migrants into a community, helping them to get on their feet, to find work, to find social services and to be connected. I want to thank Laura Sardo and all the team at NMA for all of the work that they do for our marginalised new migrant communities and for reaching out and giving support where it's most needed. Our volunteer sporting groups around the Nepean Valley regional sports centre will finally be able to put their feet up for a well-deserved break after another huge year of coaching, reffing and all-round organising through thousands of hours of community support for new outdoor seating. I was sitting on it just at the weekend and am pleased to know that I've been instrumental in being able to secure some new furniture after I copped a splinter in the leg from the old stuff that has been there since I was little. The equipment—even more proudly am I of this—was manufactured from 360,000 plastic bags, so we have the added benefit of saving all that plastic from landfill as well as not getting splinters on the backs of the legs of mums and dads sitting down there at training every week. I am incredibly proud of the 20,000-plus volunteers of Lindsay and the selfless devotion that they have to their causes. You are the heroes of our community. I will leave you with a quote from Winston Churchill that probably sums up the heart of volunteerism: 'We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give.' Happy Volunteer Day! Debate adjourned.
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2018, Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2018; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It's great to follow my colleague the member for Macquarie. She makes a very poignant point about the people whose lives have been lost through the Family Court system. In 1996, on the steps of...
It's great to follow my colleague the member for Macquarie. She makes a very poignant point about the people whose lives have been lost through the Family Court system. In 1996, on the steps of the Parramatta Family Court, Jean Lennon was murdered by her then husband or ex-partner after they had been in the Family Court. We are not talking about something that is owed or deserves a tick-and-flick mentality. I rise today in complete opposition to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2018. Anyone who has had any experience with the family law courts would agree that the need for reformation is significant, desperately required and overdue. However, there is absolutely no way that what this government has presented to us is anywhere close to the reform that we need. A generalist solution to some of the most complex legal issues facing our country will only cause greater risks for the children and families, like Jean Lennon, who are subjected to proceedings. The need for significant reform is great. Tinkering around the edges and taking a piecemeal approach is not good enough and will further risk the childhoods and the lives of those who are caught up. Labor members on this side of the House know how important the family courts are for protection and the outcomes for families who need it. It was Gough Whitlam and his government, after all, who in 1975 created the act, and since then it has remained unchanged with the exception of very minor amendments. Australian families now, though, look very different from how they looked in 1975. We have moved beyond those cultural and societal norms of families, and families today are made up of many different factors. We also now have a new epidemic flooring some families who find themselves needing the help of the Family Law Courts: domestic violence. Of course, it's not a new problem at all. It has existed for generations, but society has changed and formed the view that we no longer see domestic violence as a private matter. In 2017 the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs conducted an inquiry into family law and family violence and how the two are intersecting. I note that one of the members of this parliament who worked on that is sitting here at the desk. None of the 33 recommendations from our report have been actioned, none of the advice presented acknowledged and none of the committee's work—those people who gave evidence—supported. These recommendations were ignored by this government, yet they talk a big game when it comes to protecting those people who have found themselves on the receiving end of violence against women and the need to help and support women and children. Instead of acting on any of the recommendations, we find ourselves here, debating tinkering with a very complex system, and debating defunding a system whose entire jurisdiction is to support children who find themselves between parents who are at war. We know that not all family breakdowns end up before the Family Court needing such intervention, and I want to put on record my absolute applause for those adults who break up reasonably, respectfully and in a child-focused manner, recognising that, just because adult parties cannot make a relationship work, it should not mean the children in that relationship should suffer. When parents need the intervention, our system should be responsive. It should support the children and support them in a way that responds to their needs. The backlogs in the Family Court are causing serious issues and creating dangerous and painful situations for those who are stuck in the system. The solution is not to wipe out the entire system. It needs investment, it needs reform and it needs urgent attention. The delays are costing families huge sums of money and causing swathes of distress, and kids are being punished by having their lives placed in limbo by the ongoing delays. Take a family who has a child who is four years old. They break up. Custody over that child is contested. The child at some point over the next two years has to enrol in kindergarten, but the parents can't agree. They go back to court, each swearing an affidavit, each having representation, each facing costs. The court and the judge—a person who is not an expert on this child—make a decision in their life. That child now faces being seven or eight years old in the current system before their matter is completely resolved and they have any certainty over their lives. That is a quarter of that little person's childhood forever drained from their life because this government cannot be bothered to address the delays that we now see. Our court officers, judges and those who work in the family system need to be shown more respect by this government and have their work valued and supported, not relegated to a cost-saving exercise. This legislation that is proposed by this hapless, incompetent government who fail to see the importance of family law in our society will leave families in further crisis. I have risen a number of times in this House to bring this to the parliament's attention—to no avail though. The proposed removal of judges who are specialists that preside over matters relating to children and complex family matters is a disgrace. When you need a script for medication, you go to the doctor, a GP, not a surgeon. When you need help with your family law matter, you need a family law practitioner, not a commercial lawyer. It is basic commonsense but not for this government, who, sadly, see family law as a good place to scrape a few modest savings together at the expense of so many and our society at large. The Federal Circuit Court judges have broader experience and decide on matters as varied as trademark law, workplace relations and administrative law. Eighty per cent of matters in the Federal Circuit Court involve far less complex cases. The Family Law Court has carriage of 20 per cent of the family court matters. These are complex issues facing our society that require specialised skill and the experience of the judges that are hearing the case. These 20 per cent of cases are complicated and they can involve a range of social issues, including drug and alcohol abuse, child abuse, criminal matters, family and domestic violence, and mental ill health. These matters are serious, they are complex and they deserve the attention of judges who are specialised and equipped to deal with such things. This simplistic approach of rolling these two courts together, as proposed by this inept government on the other side, does not do anything for those families who have complex matters that require detailed and thorough hearings. These are the families who painfully and traumatically relived their experiences to give evidence at our inquiry. We've asked them for their input, but they have been ignored. The lack of consultation with regard to this bill has angered so many in the sector. Stakeholders have not been consulted. The Law Council, the legal assistance services and judges themselves have protested to the government on this matter. It is incredibly unusual to hear judges speak out on these matters, but they have been blowing their whistles as best they can in their positions. They're forced into defending themselves as they're accused by this government of not performing adequately. The consultation has been botched and Minister Porter owes nothing short of an apology to those who have had aspersions cast on them and their work. We then had the debacle over the consultation period and the changes to it, which came after the government announced the Australian Law Reform Commission would 'holistically and thoroughly investigate' and report back on the family law system. It's due next year. It's possibly the largest, most significant review of its kind to be undertaken in this complex family law system. This government is now not waiting for that inquiry to run its course and to make findings based on a thorough investigation—an inquiry, mind you, that it asked for. This inquiry will be wide ranging and will take evidence from many people who are currently in the system. This inquiry is landmark and is due to report on 31 March next year. It makes no sense whatsoever to rush or make any substantive changes before that time. Due process, adequate consultation and proper decision-making must take place given the scale of the changes that are proposed and the magnitude this court has over the lives of so many families. Family law is a serious issue. This government should be taking its responsibility to the people inside the system equally seriously. The bill needs proper consultation with input from the sector, and the government should not ignore the advice from experts that it already has in front of it. It is time to face reality and admit that it got this wrong; to listen to those who have had everyday experience of the family law system, who deserve to have their say; and to improve it for the next family who find themselves there. It would be pure arrogance for Minister Porter, the Attorney-General, to continue with the proposed changes, which are ill-conceived and ill-thought through. Sure, the government's proposed changes could streamline the system, but we know that there is not a one-size-fits-all square peg to the hole that is family law. Packaging it up neatly may work as a solution on a spreadsheet or to a bean counter or on Minister Porter's notebook but, trust me, in real life, it will not. I have a solution for him, since he seems devoid of any real ideas. How about we invest in the system? The solution is to provide the courts with the funding that they need, unlike the underfunded system we currently see. The member for Macquarie pointed out Chief Justice Diana Bryant's comments last year, where she was begging for more money and resources. This proposed bill smacks of cost saving, but it will cost our nation so much more in damages if the social fabric of our families and our communities is tarnished in this way. Ensuring that there is a large pool of judges, experienced and ready and able to fill the benches as our retiring judges leave, will provide the human resources to hear more cases in a more timely and effective manner. There is an economic and social benefit in getting through the backlog. Minister Porter is suggesting that family law court judges would face certain extinction, slowly dying out as the government refuses to replace the retiring judges. Their solution to allow generalist judges to hear complex law cases is just simply not acceptable. All the government has as evidence that this will work is a report commissioned by consultancy PricewaterhouseCoopers, which took six weeks of desktop research as well as some consultation with a few senior stakeholders. That report made some very heroic assumptions, including that there was an equivalent level of complexity between the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court. That is patently a ridiculous assumption to make and it undermines the findings of this report, which, unsurprisingly, was that the Family Court was less efficient than the Federal Circuit Court—hardly surprising when you're dealing with such complex cases. The government has handled this bill incredibly poorly and has not bothered to talk to people and groups who are in the family law system every single day: the family groups, the charities, the registrars, the legal assistance services, the lawyers and the judges to name but a few. There are absolutely serious issues facing the Family Court right now. Delays are one part. The idea that you can give the courts less money to do more with is absolutely absurd. The government continue to run a flawed agenda with a process they do not comprehend and they are relegating families and, moreover, vulnerable children to lives on a waiting list—lives which are unstable and unpredictable. The government have the capacity right now to act by giving money to the courts and by replacing the judges who have recently retired, to enable more cases to be heard in a timely manner and get those families off the waiting list. Families should not be in limbo for four years because this government see them as a place to save money. This week I have the pleasure of arranging a briefing for members of the community who know too well the shortcomings of the family law system, who know what it's like to be affected by it and who work with children who have been devastated as a result of the inadequate process of the family law system. They will come to Canberra to advocate for a better, fairer system that is focused on better, more timely outcomes for families who need it. My great fear is that, 20 years from now, someone occupying these benches will get up and make a national apology to those families being disadvantaged by the current delays. We can stand up in this place and debate this and speak to the complexities of the delays, time frames and legal-speak but, at the end of the day, we are talking about our children. We are talking about their lives and their stability. All of us in here, each and every person, who haven't experienced the dog's breakfast of family law should be grateful. The government needs a laser-like focus trained on the outcomes for children who are subject to the Family Court. It needs a laser-like focus on bringing change that is needed and funding that is so desperately required. Anything less than that is an abject failure to do the exact thing government is supposed to do, which is protect its citizens. I applaud the work of all those people in the system and thank them for their tireless work on behalf of the families and children who find themselves there. It is not a choice that people voluntarily submit themselves to without good reason. The work that these people do is intense and the consequences are immense. I look forward to welcoming the delegation of family law activists this week to parliament and to working with them to ensure that the right and just outcomes are reached, not a cost-saving exercise that benefits nobody.
White Ribbon Day | Private Members' Business | House debates
I move: That this House: (1) notes that 23 November 2018 is White Ribbon Day (WRD) followed by the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women on 25 November; (2) recognises...
I move: That this House: (1) notes that 23 November 2018 is White Ribbon Day (WRD) followed by the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women on 25 November; (2) recognises that WRD aims to prevent violence against women by increasing public awareness and challenging attitudes and behaviours that allow gendered violence to continue; (3) supports the United Nations UNiTE to End Violence against Women and the 16 days of activism campaigns which are held internationally from 25 November to 10 December each year; (4) understands that: (a) this year, as of 15 October 2018, 55 women have been killed by violence in Australia; (b) one in three women have experienced physical and/or sexual violence perpetrated by someone known to them; (c) each week on average one woman is killed by a current or former partner; and (d) domestic and family violence is the principle cause of homelessness for women and their children; (5) acknowledges the high economic cost of violence against women, which is estimated to cost the Australian economy $21 billion a year; and (6) asks all Members to show their support for the principles of WRD. Today, I'm proud to rise in support of a campaign to end violence against women and girls. I shared my personal story this time two years ago in the hope that women and girls throughout Australia would know the strength and resilience you can have after violence ends, and that no-one—no matter where they come from or their achievements in life—can have their lives interrupted by violence perpetrated against them. From 25 November until 11 December, we enter into 16 days of activism to end violence against women and girls. It's an international movement, one which I support but wish we didn't need. When we talk about gendered violence, we must recognise the intersectionality of gender violence around the world and, whilst we see it reflected in Australia, mostly in family and domestic violence, some in the world see violence against women as a weapon in war. They are different, of course, but both of them have their roots in the same place—control and power over women. Violence against women can take many, many forms. It can be easy to see for some—physical scars that leave marks which are hard to hide. For other women, violence can be financial—having money withheld or distributed as an allowance. Others may experience psychological and emotional violence, with constant threats and gaslighting. All these forms of violence are about power and control and, ultimately, a power imbalance. It's a story not too unfamiliar with the rest of our society and the power imbalances women are subjected to—not being paid equally, not having equal representation in our parliaments, not having equal positions on boards and having lower retirement incomes than men. Our society is experiencing a power imbalance, and it is no surprise that power imbalances in our homes are leading to violence at epidemic levels. When our society at large fails to value the contributions of women in our workplaces and our communities, this will continue to be a problem. I've risen many times to speak in support of White Ribbon, speaking up for the need to make the changes required to make sure women are safe in our homes, our streets, our workplaces and around the world. I'm committed to making sure the 63 women who have been murdered in 2018—this year—have not lost their lives for nothing. I do not want to continue to see an increase in those statistics. These 63 women provide each of us with a determination to do better and to be better. Two weeks ago, we watched in horror as the media reported the rape of a seven-year-old girl while she attended a dance class in Sydney. She was attending her weekly class, like so many children do, her childhood is now interrupted by a violent act against her by a man. Devastatingly, she joins the one in five girls who have been sexually assaulted by age 15 in this country. These are not numbers. These are lives of girls and women who have had their lives irrevocably disrupted by violence perpetrated against them. These are numbers we highlight, but, of course, we know there are so, so many more—hundreds of thousands of incidences of domestic violence being felt in our country each week. These numbers are just those that are reported for victims we know about. We know many women live in fear of speaking out because, when they do, the punishment is harsh, unrelenting and further used by the perpetrator to continue to instil fear and terror and to launch threats against their victims. We must join together as a nation to be their voices. We must give our strength to them until they regain theirs. We have reached a national crisis point. How many more women and how many more children must have their lives interrupted before this epidemic is addressed in a substantive and meaningful way? It has never been tolerable to allow this crisis to continue. We are a smart nation. We know what needs to be done. What we don't have, though, is the political will, understanding or desire to fix a problem facing half the nation's population—women. We have leaders who are men and parliaments full of blokes who have likely never been on the receiving end of such treatment, because we know the statistics tell us that this affects women predominantly more than it does men. If you haven't experienced it, it can be hard to understand it. We know what needs to be done. Our experts and our communities have told us. The list is short, simple and common sense. It is time to fund women's crisis centres so, when it comes time to leave, there is somewhere for women to go. It is time to support women through legal services and for a proper, well-funded Family Court system so, when a woman does leave, she isn't facing systems abuse. It is time to eliminate current behaviours that enable violence against women, to educate and to support programs that shift attitudes and create a society rooted in equality, not power imbalances. It is time to ensure that men who are perpetrators are held to account by treating it as a criminal offence—no longer is it a private matter. We also need to profile offenders in order to better understand their patterns and their likelihood of reoffending and what drives them to offend in the first place. It is time to give women access to paid leave so, when a woman does leave, she can continue her employment and have the security of knowing that her job will still be there. Access to unpaid leave and her own super does nothing to support a woman who needs to go. It is time to end the gendered slurs on women in workplaces in senior roles— (Time expired)
Social Services Legislation Amendment (Housing Affordability) Bill 2017; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
We are currently facing a housing crisis in this country. The cost of living is rising, and wages have not been this stagnant since the release of Jurassic Park in 1998. This government's...
We are currently facing a housing crisis in this country. The cost of living is rising, and wages have not been this stagnant since the release of Jurassic Park in 1998. This government's solution is to tell low-income earners that, if they ever want to be able to afford housing, they need to stop eating smashed avocado. The Social Services Legislation Amendment (Housing Affordability) Bill 2017 outlines the government's perception that there is a need to create a system for the Automatic Rent Deduction Scheme. This scheme will be applied to public- and community-housing tenants who rely on income support or family assistance payments. This government is victimising individuals and families who are already struggling with this government's out-of-touch attacks on low-income earners. I bet the people who are behind this bill have never gone to the letterbox and felt their stomach turn, never experienced the fear or the dread of opening that bill for fear that they won't be able to make the rent on time from having to pay something that lands unexpectedly. They've never had to make the choice between eating and paying rent. I use the word 'choice' because it is a human right that these people are attempting to take away from people who are affected by the outcomes of this bill. The basic dignity of being able to decide if you can pay your bills, buy groceries or replace school shoes is something that people who need income support value. This bill would introduce the Automatic Rent Deduction Scheme. Under the Automatic Rent Deduction Scheme, everyone who receives an income support payment or family tax benefit and lives in public or community housing could have their payment withheld by Centrelink and paid directly to their housing provider. What concerns me, though, is the ability for people to choose to manage their own already limited finances and make decisions that potentially impact their day-to-day lives. This bill will allow states, territories and community housing providers to withhold a portion of the tenants' income support payments and use those funds to directly pay the rent, utilities and other costs relating to the dwelling on behalf of those tenants. It will enable providers to do this with family tax benefits also. This bill makes changes also to the administration of the National Rental Affordability Scheme by removing the ambiguity in relation to the calculation of below-market rents in a given year, providing flexibility in the way that maximum periods of vacancy are prescribed, and authorising the variation of conditions to allocation and the transfer of allocations to low-rent dwellings. When we were last in government, we tried to introduce an automatic rent deduction scheme. The purpose of that, though, was to protect vulnerable individuals who were at risk of homelessness, and it was targeted in its scope. The government's scheme, on the other hand, according to the National Social Security Rights Network, proposes a very broad management scheme for social housing which ignores the very complex nature and causes of homelessness. I have incredibly serious concerns about how this government's plans will affect social-housing tenants. I also have concerns about how this will affect victims of domestic violence. Seventy-two thousand women sought homelessness services in the 2016-17 financial year due to family violence. This alone should paint a worrying picture about the very real and tangible risk of further pushing women into housing stress and poverty. Many people ask me: is housing a women's issue? The trends indicate that women are retiring more and more frequently into housing stress. Of women over 55 in the low- to middle-income group, more than 640,000 women, 15 per cent are already in housing stress and over half a million are likely to come into housing stress moving forward. For those women who are accessing homelessness services, those in the over-55 category have increased by four per cent, and women over 65 have increased by 11 per cent. This is four times the general housing population. Gendered housing analysis shows that there are two key areas: firstly, housing access needs of older women—affordable housing close to transport and/or medical services—and, secondly, women exiting houses where there is violence, who may leave with children. Filthy Rich and Homeless, which aired on ABC on 14 August as part of a three-part series, told a story of too many Australians being pushed to the fringes and finding themselves in need of housing assistance. They followed the case of Selvi, a woman who lives in Kingswood in my electorate. She's a single mum to three small children. She found herself homeless after separating from her partner and has been living in temporary accommodation in transitional housing. Domestic violence is the lead cause of homelessness for women in Australia, and the reforms we have seen in my state of New South Wales do nothing whatsoever to address what we already know is happening In her part of the documentary, Selvi spoke of her struggle to find a permanent place for her family to call home and of approaching the private market and getting knockback after knockback because she's a single mum. Moreover, it's because affordability of private rentals is a pathetic one per cent. One per cent of private rental homes are affordable for those on low incomes. Selvi spoke of the agonising multi-year wait and multi-year waiting times for emergency housing from the Department of Housing. We know the best place for children and young people is in a stable home. The Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government has ignored those on the fringes. It's now been five years. They have turned their back on so many vulnerable people in Lindsay and in communities right across Australia, doing nothing other than demonising those who can't find a home. I can't imagine what it would be like to be in Selvi's position. I'm a mum and I have three kids my own. But raising three children in temporary accommodation must be absolutely heart-wrenching for her as a mum. She's doing the best she can and she's incredible. Her determination to get out of that situation is commended. Those on the other side think that this isn't a real issue. They often make light of it. I can't remember—and I don't care to remember—which one of them it was, because it is a reflection on all of them over there. They are making light of the situation we find our country in. They are telling people they can afford a house if they get rich parents, stop eating smashed avocado or simply get a better job. How can this government look at people like Selvi and her three children and call that a solution? They were out of touch under Turnbull—who didn't even live in the Prime Minister's residence because his own home was too plumb—they were out of touch under Abbott and they are still out of touch now. Between 2011 and 2016 the number of people experiencing homelessness in New South Wales increased by 37 per cent. In the city of Sydney, it increased by 48 per cent, which is far higher than the nationwide increase of 14 per cent. This increase is due to the lack of affordable housing. There are 60,000 applicants on the social housing waiting list in New South Wales and less than one per cent of private rentals are affordable for them. There's a need to identify specialist housing services to support women who are exiting violence. Housing organisations have expressed concerns about the arbitrary nature of the scheme that is proposed to be introduced by this bill depriving tenants of the flexibility to respond to upcoming financial obligations. Labor's scheme would have exempted deductions for compensation made for damage caused by others, including as a result of domestic or family violence. The government's bill, as it stands, could mean that a tenant experiencing family or domestic violence could be liable for the damage caused by the perpetrator. We do not support a mandatory automatic rent deduction scheme for all public and social housing tenants; only when we are aiming to prevent homelessness should we apply automatic rent deductions. We will keep this Liberal government accountable, and we will ensure that we move amendments in the Senate to make sure that those who are most vulnerable, those individuals who are in arrears, are not at risk of being left on the street without a place to live—left behind by this government. We'll move an amendment to cap the maximum deduction to prevent the scheme from forcing people into housing distress and to make sure people have money to meet other needs and pay other bills as they arise. Labor will move amendments to require that compulsory deductions can be made for rent and utilities and not property damage. This is to protect people from being unfairly held responsible for somebody else's actions in the case of domestic and family violence. Currently 86 per cent of public and social housing tenants use the rent deduction scheme. At the moment, some social housing tenants are also income support recipients and they can choose to have the Department of Human Services withhold a portion of their fortnightly payment and pay it directly to their housing provider to cover rent and some bills. It's an absolute shame to see young people in this country being locked out of the housing market under this government. The Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government can't be trusted to deliver housing reform, let alone something like we need to see in this sector. The government needs to have a clear focus and focus their energy on clawing back the income that oversees investors are taking from our nation and the housing market.
I will just pick up on what the member for Corangamite just said about helping victims of domestic violence. The Social Services Legislation Amendment (Housing Affordability) Bill 2017, as it...
I will just pick up on what the member for Corangamite just said about helping victims of domestic violence. The Social Services Legislation Amendment (Housing Affordability) Bill 2017, as it stands today, could mean that a tenant who is experiencing family or domestic violence could actually be liable for the damage caused to a rented property by someone who is an abusive partner. We don't support this mandatory Automatic Rent Deduction Scheme for all public- and social-housing tenants. Only when we are aiming to prevent homelessness should we apply automatic rent deductions. We on this side of the House will keep those opposite accountable, and we will ensure that we move amendments in the Senate to make sure that those who are the most vulnerable, who are most at risk, those individuals who are in arrears, are not at risk of being left on the streets without a place to live, left behind by this government. We will move an amendment to cap the maximum deduction to prevent the scheme forcing people into housing stress and to make sure that people have money to meet their other needs and pay their other bills—for essentials, like food. We will also move amendments to require that compulsory deductions can only be made for rent and utilities and not for property damage. This is to protect people from being unfairly held responsible for another person's actions, including in the case of family and domestic violence. Around 86 per cent of public- and social-housing tenants use the Rent Deduction Scheme currently. At the moment, some social-housing tenants are also income support recipients. They can choose to have the Department of Human Services withhold a portion of their fortnightly payment already. Fancy that! Giving people a little bit of choice and control over their own lives! Simply because they are on income support does not mean they need to be treated in this way or demonised. It's an absolute shame and an outright disgrace to see young people and potential home buyers being locked out of our housing market in this country, with housing stress on the increase and only one per cent of private rentals actually being labelled as affordable. The Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government can't deliver a pizza—they'll probably deliver us another Prime Minister before their term ends—let alone deliver the housing affordability solutions that we need. They've been in government now for almost six years, and we are still waiting.
National Apology to Victims and Survivors of Institutional Child Sexual Abuse | Motions | House debates
I'd like to acknowledge the words of the member for Higgins. Obviously, this is deeply emotional content and certainly a difficult thing to rise in here and speak about. Yesterday, as a...
I'd like to acknowledge the words of the member for Higgins. Obviously, this is deeply emotional content and certainly a difficult thing to rise in here and speak about. Yesterday, as a parliament, on behalf of our nation, we did take that fundamental step towards justice for the survivors and the victims of child sex abuse. This is a very, very small step but one in the right direction, and I'm deeply saddened that it has taken us so long to right the wrongs of the past injustices. To all of those with innocence stolen and childhoods lost and who went on to suffer the effects of abuse induced trauma caused by people who should've known better, the apology is not just a sign of righting wrongs; it is a commitment to do better. I have raised my own children to say sorry, but only if they are, and, in being sorry, to make a commitment to never commit the same mistake again. This is with moderate success with children, but for adults there should be no excuse. I heard many stories throughout the royal commission of terrible injustices. A now grown man with grandchildren of his own, six in all, told me of his abuse in an institution. I heard from a man who, since the time of his abuse as a child in a boys home, had not told anyone in his family about his mistreatment, not one single person—not the woman he married, not his siblings, not his parents; no-one. What an isolating and sad secret that is to keep. After his initial abuse in the boys home, he did tell someone though. He disclosed his treatment to another adult at that facility—an adult in a trusted position who should've known better, an adult who should've done something, an adult who should've cared and who should have acted, an adult who, in acting, may have prevented this perpetrator from committing more abuse on another child. But that didn't happen. Instead, the young boy was taken to the hospital wing to recover from the abuse and then remained there until they relocated the perpetrating adult to another facility to repeat the sins all over again. This young, traumatised boy grew up, like we all do, bearing the scars and hangovers of our childhoods. He became a school dropout and engaged in petty crime. As the stresses of day-to-day life mounted, he spiralled into a life of alcoholism. He became a violent perpetrator of domestic violence. This little boy, who had his childhood interrupted by an adult behaving badly, became a man whose life became ruined. Later on, he would spend time in jail. This little boy grew into a man with trauma so deep, it impacted every single corner of his life. This is a man I know well, a man I have known my entire life, who held a secret so close to his chest for nearly all of his life. Only through the process of a royal commission, only through hearing the stories publicised, reading the papers, and revealing the ugliness of the abuse was he able to speak about it, to raise his voice. I thank all of those people who spoke out. It is in their power and their courage that allowed people like this little boy, now a man, to speak up. I'm grateful for them and I call them the real heroes of this story—a story that I hope will not become a set of recommendations in a report somewhere gathering dust. I'm grateful for those in this place who brought forward the royal commission and showed leadership—something so many others are too scared to do. Too often the courage the do what is right is absent and condemned to popular opinion or pressure only. I want to thank Joanne McCarthy, the journalist at the Newcastle Herald. I note the member for Newcastle is here now and she will probably be up here later to talk about exactly that. Jo McCarthy followed the story and brought it to light. She gave so many who had no voice the courage and she showed her journalistic craft as being what it should be. She showed personal integrity, and followed the story to where it got to, where we saw it. I would like to commend the courage of Chrissie Foster and her family, who, even through deep personal tragedy, still fought for others; and Leonie Sheedy at CLAN for making sure there was somewhere for victims to turn. None of these people wanted to be in this position, to draw the thanks of the houses. But to help so many people, I am thankful they were and I'm sorry that they had to. I will always wonder, for that little boy who grew into the man, what kind of life he might have gone on to have. If not for the abuse, if not from living through adults doing bad things, he, I am sure, grieves for a life of a potential unmet, a life denied the freedom of a safe childhood, a life impacted and stained forever by actions of adults who had a choice and who chose to behave in this way. This is but one story. I sure, though, it reflects so many stories and so many unmet potential lives. There were 8,000 victims who provided submissions in private sessions, 1,000 victims who provided written submissions. Half of those victims were between 10—that's the same age as my youngest child—and 14 years of age at the time of suffering the abuse; 64.3 per cent of those victims were boys at the time the abuse occurred, with 93.8 per cent of the abusers being men and 83.8 per cent of those abusers were adults. This House can be powerful and I pay tribute to the monumental work of then Prime Minister Julia Gillard when on 12 November 2012 she announced the decision to establish a Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. She said at the time that the allegations that had come to light recently about sexual abuse had been heartbreaking. They were then and they still are today. These are insidious evil acts to which no child should be subject. The individuals concerned deserve the most thorough of investigations into the wrongs that have been committed against them. They deserve to have their voices heard and their claims investigated. She believed that a royal commission was the best way to do this, and there were people that said that it wasn't, but I'm glad that she persisted. It was the Gillard Labor government that created the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses into Child Sexual Abuse in 2013, and this is the exact kind of thing a royal commission ought to be used for. The royal commission gave the victims of child sexual abuse hope that they can have a future in which they can move on from the past, where they were wronged. I want to thank all of the commissioners and the staff, who, for months, listened to what would have been incredibly heartbreaking and disturbing testimony of the courageous men and women who provided it. Your work is appreciated and will not be forgotten. I want to thank the survivors of sexual abuse, who have been waiting their whole lives for someone to take accountability for what was done and for someone to address the horrific crimes that were perpetrated against them as children. Our communities, our institutions and our nation do better into the future to pay those survivors the ultimate honour by making sure the crimes of the past are not committed into the future. Thank you.
I rise today to talk about JDRF being at the forefront of investigating type 1 diabetes research. They have been a great advocate in finding a cure and promoting prevention and treatment for...
I rise today to talk about JDRF being at the forefront of investigating type 1 diabetes research. They have been a great advocate in finding a cure and promoting prevention and treatment for those with type 1 diabetes. In my electorate of Lindsay, 1,129 people live with type 1 diabetes, and JDRF does great work advocating on behalf of those people and 120,000 other type 1 diabetics across Australia each and every day. This number, sadly, keeps growing, and that's why it's vital to find a cure for this autoimmune disease. I'm very proud to see the progress made under the Australian Type 1 Diabetes Clinical Research Network, developed from an initial $5 million investment by the then Labor government in 2010. The funding for the CRN will be fully expended by June 2019. The CRN is an incredible tool for Australian scientists to lead the way on medical research for type 1 diabetes. Its continued impact is vital to paving a way for a cure. That's why the JDRF is advocating for phase 3 of the network, which will ensure enduring change for type 1 diabetics in Lindsay and also across the country. In my electorate, this was brought to my attention by the wonderful Emma Hogan. I met Emma and her mum, Judy, for the first time in 2014. She's a young, proud JDRF advocate, and her dedication has inspired me to be a firm supporter of finding a cure and improving the lives of all type 1 diabetics and their families. Emma was diagnosed with diabetes in 2009, when she was just seven years old. She's now 16 and learning how to drive and do those other things teenagers like to terrorise us with. She can never, though, be carefree or laid back like my 16-year-old daughter, because her mind is always racing, asking the questions: 'What are my sugar levels at?' 'Have I calculated enough insulin to eat my lunch?' Twenty thousand finger pricks over her lifetime, and Emma is still no closer to being able to let go and relax like most teenagers should be able to. Life is, though, getting easier for type 1 diabetics, and it's only through the work of advocates like Emma and her peers that that can happen. We now have insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring—or CGMs, as they like to call them—and better day-to-day technology that has made and will continue to make their lives easier. But there is no rest until we find a cure for this lifelong disease. JDRF needs $50 million to fund the next phase of the clinical research network to expand its research, start more clinical trials and ultimately find a cure that all of us are so desperate to have. Without the funding, the CRN will be unable to keep up their incredible work across the 65 institutions and 250 researchers that are trying to progress this research to the next vital stage, which will unlock a cure and new treatments for type 1 diabetics. A new funding commitment is needed now because in-depth and comprehensive research, as we know, holds the key to most things. But JDRF is more than just funding for research. It fosters a sense of community for the type 1 diabetic sufferers and their families through the programs such as the JDRF Peer Support Program, an incredible service run by volunteers that connects those affected by type 1 diabetes. It gives support, guidance and hope to those affected that they are not alone in the day-to-day struggles of understanding and managing their conditions. Most important, though, are the friendships and the hopes shared at incredible events like the JDRF One Walk. I was pleased to be at the one that was hosted last year. I didn't get to participate in the walk, because I took my kids and one of them ended up passing out and was quite unwell. But it was great to be there, and the wave of support was incredible. But this year I don't have to travel far and go into Homebush for the walk, because Emma Hogan and her mum, Judy, are hosting the first-ever JDRF One Walk in Penrith this Sunday. I'll be very proud to support Emma and the amazing work she has done, and to be in attendance at Jamison Park with hundreds of others from around our electorate to see the incredible work they've put into bringing the type 1 community together and making the rest of our community more aware of their journeys. I just want to say thank you to Emma and Judy for their long-term dedication and commitment to turning type 1 into type none. The JDRF One Walk will bring together the core of JDRF's message: funding for medical research and fostering community. Together we'll raise money for research while enjoying what is truly great about the JDRF community. I'll be there this Sunday and I will be walking. I will be ready for a fun day, with lunch, kids' activities and all the things that go into recognising the incredible work that Emma and the JDRF team have done.
Nepean Football Association, Lindsay Electorate: National Rugby League School to Work Program | Constituency Statements | House debates
The popularity of football in my area continues to rise. There are two fantastic organisations in my community I'd like to recognise today. One is the National Rugby League and the other is the...
The popularity of football in my area continues to rise. There are two fantastic organisations in my community I'd like to recognise today. One is the National Rugby League and the other is the Nepean Football Association. The Nepean Football Association is responsible for over 1,000 teams with over 12,000 registered players and 31 affiliated clubs. The Nepean FC representative football club, the Nepean Referees Group and the Nepean Dragons special needs football club are also vital aspects of the sporting and recreational culture that is rapidly growing and fostered by the Nepean Football Association. The association also stands to promote leadership, friendship, skills, team work, fair and respectful play as well as skills development. Local sporting and recreation in my electorate of Lindsay has never been more important. Research shows nearly six in 10 people in the Nepean Blue Mountains area are overweight or obese, according to expert figures. Getting active and healthy has never been more valued in our area. I'd like to formally recognise the great work the Nepean Football Association does to keep our community active and foster the important values we can all be proud of. The Penrith Football Club, an institution in our community, was recognised for having reached 50 years. The Henry Lawson Club was recognised for having reached 40 years and the Glenmore Park Football Club for 25 years. Thank you to the volunteers who keep those clubs running. I'd like to recognise the following people who make great the work that the Nepean Football Association does: the chair, Frances Refalo, and the directors, Greg, Stacey, Gail, Martin, Di and John. I also recognise Laurie Solomon, who has served the club for 30 years with the Nepean Football Association, and James Rankine, who has accredited over 600 coaches. I thank Linda Cerone, who has given 20 years to our local community in her role. Thanks to Colleen, Alicia, Caitlin and Ryan as well. I want to say a big thank you to all of the volunteers, parents, coaches and managers who turn up week in, week out. I'd like to mention the valued work that's done by the NRL through their School To Work Program, which is an education and employment program that supports and encourages young Indigenous Australians to stay at school and aspire to their goals. It assist them with transitioning to further education and employment. The program has supported more than a thousand Indigenous students since 2011, with a 95 per cent success rate. I think that we'd all agree that that is quite significant. We've had over 1,000 Indigenous kids since 2011 who have gone on to do some amazing things. Young Indigenous kids are often left behind and face obstacles in our education system. I think we are all too well aware of that. I'd like to take this opportunity to recognise the class of 2018 from my electorate: Bayley Blackmore and Mitchell Nicholls from Jamison High School; Jay-Renee Hardy and Shivahni Nair from Colyton High School; Louise Neville and Jack Wheatley from Cambridge Park High School; and Lily Popovich and Ashley Bridge from Caroline Chisholm College, alumni of my former school. I commend the graduating class and wish them all the best for their bright futures, and I thank Jaymes Boland-Rudder, the NRL's head of government and community relations, for bringing these individuals to my attention and always inviting me along.
Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission Bill 2018, Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2018; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It's always good to follow the member for Moreton in his passionate speech, particularly about aged care, and it's great to have so many Labor people up here speaking on this important issue....
It's always good to follow the member for Moreton in his passionate speech, particularly about aged care, and it's great to have so many Labor people up here speaking on this important issue. It's something that we need to all consider, given that we're all ageing and we're all going to get there at some point—some sooner than others, as I note especially when I stand in this chamber with those around me now. We need to do better in the aged-care sector. Currently 1.3 million Australians are receiving some form of aged care, provided by about 400,000 dedicated nurses and carers. I must say that the reports we've seen on Four Corners don't reflect all of the great work that is being done by some of those hardworking and dedicated aged carers. Given that we're all ageing and we'll all be there at some point, in order to keep up with the monumental demand, which is going to increase exponentially by 2056, the aged-care workforce needs to triple to adequately deliver services. Older Australian will make up around one in four of the population. There are over 14,000 age pensioners living in my electorate of Lindsay. Not all of them receive aged care, but it is fair to say that at some point they will. We need to establish this new Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission and we need do it now—no more stalling, no more waiting. Given the government dumped Labor's $1.5 billion workforce compact and supplement after the 2013 election, we have consistently called for the development of a comprehensive aged-care workforce development strategy to address the issues of training and staffing levels on an ageing workforce. The government finally addressed workforce issues by announcing $1.9 million for an aged-care workforce taskforce in the 2017-18 budget; however, when the government made the membership of its task force public six months later, it failed, ironically, to include any representatives from the aged-care workforce. The government's long-term inaction in the aged-care sector means devastating things for everyday Australians. The quality standards and reporting systems are not working, as was very adequately outlined by the member for Moreton. Aged-care workers are under immense pressure to cope with the increasing amount of work and the same—in some cases less—pay, respect and support. I've had representations in my electorate from aged-care workers who are not given adequate breaks; they're not given adequate training; and they're not given adequate conditions to work in under the pressure that they do, lovingly and caringly providing assistance and support to older Australians. The government, however, thinks that funding just 14,000 new home care packages is enough to deal with the backlog that we have seen grow to 108,000 people currently waiting in the last six months, including 88,000 people with high needs, many living with dementia. Around 54,000 Australians are receiving no packages at all. I watched my great-uncle suffer with dementia. It's not a pleasant disease to watch somebody die from. It's not a pleasant thing to watch them lose all their functions and their ability to be alive, slowly and painfully. We need aged-care workers who are adequately trained and also a government who is willing to openly and transparently provide that support. The average wait time for somebody at the moment for a level 3 and 4 package is still more than 12 months. I can't imagine watching what my great-uncle went through and then saying that we've got to wait another three or four or 12 months. I don't know what our family would have done. We are also awaiting key data, including a state and territory breakdown of the home care package wait list. Australians who rely on these services also deserve to know when the government's budget, which announced the 14,000 places, will be released and delivered. It is now clear, though, that the government and the minister have failed to curb the growing home care package wait list and have done nothing whatsoever to reduce this aged-care crisis that has occurred under their watch. The Liberal government shouldn't be waiting for the royal commission to finish before starting to make an effort to fix this national crisis. I note that in May, when Bill Shorten said to this parliament that there was a crisis in the aged-care sector, the government called it the equivalent of committing elder abuse. It is good that they are now actually starting to listen and pay attention. It's a shame that it took Four Corners to reveal that, but that's another reason why we need a good ABC, I guess. More than two months after this minister for aged care received the Aged Care Workforce Strategy Taskforce's report A matter of care, the Liberal government finally released their strategy. On the other side they seem to be a government of blue skies and rainbows and unicorns. It would seem that they're planning on driving this reform in the sector without having to provide any additional funding whatsoever to implement the strategy. The strategy needs to consider issues such as the proposal for 24-hour registered nurse coverage at residential aged-care facilities as well as the important role of professionals such as GPs, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and dietitians and the impact that the allied healthcare profession can have on older Australians. I acknowledge the chair of this report, John Pollaers, for his important work, and I implore the government to take on the strategy seriously and implement it now without any further delay. It was only in May this year that the government was refusing to acknowledge that our aged-care system was in a state of national crisis, a crisis that has been caused by endless cuts to this sector. After six years and three prime ministers, those opposite still can't get it right. In his first year as Treasurer, the now Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, cut almost $2 billion from the aged-care sector. Despite this track record, I hope that he makes good and takes this crisis seriously. We've seen report after report and review after review ignored, just collecting dust on the shelves of all of us who have copies of them in our offices, without the government showing any desire or ability to fix the problems. The government's inaction, denial and cruel cuts have manifested in not even being able to fill three vacancies on its advisory council, which is quite concerning given the level of responsibility that the advisory council has. We only have to look at the budget and no further to understand that those opposite have never, and will never, put the best interests of older Australians front and centre. We see that not just in the aged-care crisis but also in their cutting the energy supplement and cutting back Medicare services for older Australians. This government is completely out of touch when it comes to older Australians. It will never put them front and centre, this generation of people who have worked hard to give us the standard of living that we all enjoy now. The government hasn't allocated a single dollar for Australia's aged-care system in this year's budget. Not only did it underdeliver, but the budget was also quite dishonest and underhanded in trying to say that it funded things which it didn't. Playing politics with the lives of old people is never fun. It's now evident, by the government's own admission, that the 2018-19 budget response of 14,000 home care packages over four years is woefully inadequate, given that the waiting list, as I said before, is up to 108,000. Disappointingly, the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison—and-who's-next?—government has shown a complete lack of commitment to our older Australians by cutting billions from the aged-care system. It is often said in this place that you are judged by how you treat your most vulnerable people, and I think this is an appalling indictment and a sad reflection on those opposite. Funding only 14,000 new in-home aged-care packages over four years is cruel and made even worse by the fact that the funding is coming from within the aged-care budget, not from new money. Instead of focusing on the needs of older Australians, those opposite have been quite busy and quite successful at fighting themselves. If only they were as good at fighting for older Australians as they are at fighting themselves, I think we'd all be in a better position here. They've denied their duty of care. In contrast, though, Labor has a strong track record when it comes to ageing reform. It was Labor that introduced the historic Living Longer Living Better reforms in 2012, and it will be Labor that will make ageing and dementia a national priority. Only a Labor government will fight to make sure that older Australians are getting their fair share. The government has created this aged-care crisis and ignored it for so long now that it's going to take a mammoth effort on our part to fix it when we're in government. It astounds me that this government can justify $80 billion in tax cuts for the big end of town, including $17 billion for the big-bank fat cats, while stripping away funding from our most vulnerable Australians. I think it's important to point out the anomalies in giving people a tax cut while older Australians with dementia and high needs are basically left to rot in a state of disarray. It's particularly cruel, though, after the government promised older Australians it would address the injustices in the aged-care sector. The government needs to apologise for constantly overpromising and underdelivering and for failing older Australians while giving away $80 billion in tax cuts. Those opposite must start to work collaboratively with unions and aged-care providers in order to compete with the growing demands and pressures being placed on the sector and to correct the injustices that have been done in the aged-care frame. If this government fails to act, we will see not only the material impact on older Australians but also the mental impact of the stress and anxiety in the minds of older Australians who are left to fight for themselves and the families and carers who look after them voluntarily. This government has created the crisis, and it needs to come clean and fix it. Its failure to fix this crisis is an absolute reflection on how this government feels about older Australians.
Fair Work Amendment (Restoring Penalty Rates) Bill 2018; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It is great to follow the member for Oxley on this very important Fair Work Amendment (Restoring Penalty Rates) Bill 2018. The retail industry is the second-largest employment category in...
It is great to follow the member for Oxley on this very important Fair Work Amendment (Restoring Penalty Rates) Bill 2018. The retail industry is the second-largest employment category in Australia and employs 1.2 million people, or one in nine Aussies, and 52 per cent of those workers have absolutely no post-school qualifications. In my electorate of Lindsay the retail trade employs over 12,000 people. These working Australians are relying on penalty rates to survive. The Liberal government's savage cuts to penalty rates mean on average a $77 a week pay cut. More than 75,000 people in my electorate—that is, more than half of my electorate—have jobs that will be affected by these cuts and will continue to be out of pocket. We need to stand up for working people and their conditions. Labor has a proud history of supporting workers. According to the calculations made by the ACTU, a level 6 cook who works Sunday to Thursday every week will be $1,000 a year worse off. Penalty rates are not a luxury. They put food on the table, pay the bills and fill up the car. Employees who rely on penalty rates to meet their household expenditure are far more likely to be a single parent, a woman, a young person, on an income of less than $30,000 or living in regional Australia. I ask: where are the Nats on this? These penalty rate cuts stand to negatively and disproportionately affect more women and young people. They also pose a huge risk to our local economies and communities. This is simply not good enough. Under this government, Sunday penalty rates will be cut next year and again the year after that. Make absolutely no mistake: Scott Morrison and the Liberal government support cuts to penalty rates. They voted eight times to support these savage cuts, and they want to take them even further. Currently the industries that are worst affected are retail, hospitality, fast food and pharmacy. We know this government has plans to further slash the wages of ordinary workers, which begs the question: which industry is next? Our living standards are what make this country a great place to live. When our industrial systems are vandalised, these standards are the things that are most at risk. Cuts to penalty rates are exactly that: vandalism of our industrial system and an attack on our living standards. We keep hearing about Australian workers being ripped off. It is happening everywhere; it is rife. Over the last 12 months, from 15 June to 16 July, the Fair Work Ombudsman recovered more than $27 million owed to over 11,000 workers from almost 30,000 allegations of Fair Work Act breaches. These astronomical numbers represent only those instances of underpayment and exploitation that were reported to the ombudsman. How many are not reported? This Liberal government is so out of touch. It is happier to line the pockets of big business and the big end of town than to give the workers of Australia a fair go. We must do everything we can to fight back, restore these penalty rates and change the rules. For the life of me, I cannot understand why low-paid workers are always in the firing line of this cruel government. How can anyone justify taking money from those who most need it? This shows how out of touch this government really is with the lives of middle- and low-income earners. The Prime Minister gives millionaires a tax cut and big companies get billion-dollar tax handouts, yet inequality is at a 75-year high. Australia has seen some of the lowest wage rises in 25 years. Cuts to working Australian wages are not emblematic of the Australian 'fair go'. This government has already cut the take-home pay of 700,000 working people across the country with the changes to penalty rates. Considering wages in Australia have been stagnant ever since this government was elected in 2013 under Abbott, then Turnbull and now Morrison—and who knows who's next; it seems like everyone gets a turn over there!—its decisions are a kick in the guts for working people who are already struggling to get by. This government wants to further undermine workers' rights and their unions. It is the job of the government of the day to alleviate the pain and struggles that everyday Australians face. Pay and conditions are not supposed to stagnate or go backwards, and this is not alleviating the pain or helping the cost of living. People need penalty rates to make ends meet. Every cent counts for so many people across this country, whether it is the working mum who spends weekends away from her family in order to put food on the table or the struggling uni student who, despite juggling work and university commitments, is still eating two-minute noodles for dinner every night. When I was a uni student, I ate frozen veggies because I didn't like the noodles—that's how I survived. Every single cent counts. Labor will never ever support the undermining of workers' rights and their conditions. Labor understands the value of an extra $77 a week for working Australians and their families. Penalty rate cuts mean less income tax revenue because people are earning less, resulting in more people relying on Centrelink to make ends meet. They also means workers have less money to spend in local shops, restaurants and businesses. Everybody loses under this government. Penalty rate cuts are hurting Australians, and this government must do more. Everybody deserves decent pay and conditions. I encourage everybody to attend the Change the Rules rally on 23 October in Sydney. Join your union, support the campaign and stand up and fight back.
Lindsay Electorate: Frocktober | Statements by Members | House debates
One woman dies every eight hours from ovarian cancer. It is the ninth-most-common cancer and the most lethal of all the gynaecological cancers. It has few warning symptoms and no early detection...
One woman dies every eight hours from ovarian cancer. It is the ninth-most-common cancer and the most lethal of all the gynaecological cancers. It has few warning symptoms and no early detection test—it is called the silent killer. Four women are diagnosed each and every day in Australia. Whether it is ovarian or cervical cancer, endometriosis or polycystic ovary syndrome, successive governments have failed to recognise the value of funding research into these women's issues adequately. It is just another reason why women are needed in this place, sitting at the decision-making tables leading those debates and helping to tackle the issues that are facing women, who make up half the population. Women's issues and issues affecting gynaecological health had been ignored and overlooked for far too long. This year I'm very proud to be participating in Frocktober, where team Lindsay ladies frock up to raise money and awareness for ovarian cancer and a diagnostic screening test for early diagnosis that will help reduce the fatality rate of this silent killer. Frocktober is in its 12th year and continues to get bigger and better each year. It involves wearing a dress each day and snapping a photo to share on social media to encourage others to encourage awareness of the 1,600 women who are diagnosed every single year. I would like to acknowledge those around me have taken up the fight: the Lindsay Ladies Frock Up! team: Amanda Wiley, Janis Donnelly-Coode and Peggy Wilcox, inspired by the formidable Ellie Whiteaker, who participated last year and clocked over $4,000 in donations. A massive shout-out to all those people have already supported our efforts. Currently, our team has $1,500 and will power through the second part of the month hoping to double that. I implore anybody who can to frock-up and donate to help together to frock cancer.
Women: Economic Security | Statements by Members | House debates
Older Australian women in this country are the fastest-growing group of people living in poverty and the fastest-growing group of homeless people. Today Labor are announcing our new policy...
Older Australian women in this country are the fastest-growing group of people living in poverty and the fastest-growing group of homeless people. Today Labor are announcing our new policy supporting women's superannuation, which will hopefully lead to a decrease in those horrific numbers. Women retire with significantly lower superannuation balances than men—40 per cent are lower than men's. On this side of the House we have a Labor Status of Women Caucus Committee, which I've very proudly been the secretary of for the last two and a bit years. I want to thank all of the members of that committee, in particular the chair, Sharon Claydon, and all of the people who have worked so tirelessly. Whether it was from Perth to Penrith or Alice Springs to Adelaide, we held consultations right across this country, hearing from women about what it is they need from government, and what government needs to do, to act and change the story. I am proud that our leadership team have acted and have made some tough decisions to be able to announce this $400 million package, which is a significant step in making sure that older women in this country are getting a fairer deal—from ensuring that recipients of Commonwealth paid parental leave, including the dads, continue to receive superannuation contributions, to phasing out the $450-minimum monthly income threshold for those who are able to receive superannuation payments. I want to commend the work of the Status of Women Caucus Committee and thank everybody who helped with those consultations.