Tim Wilson's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Jonceski, Mr Ljupco (Luch) | Condolences | House debates
I remember at the end of last year, as I left the building at the end of 2025, on the way out I said goodbye to Luch. Like everybody else in this chamber, when we said goodbye at the end of last...
I remember at the end of last year, as I left the building at the end of 2025, on the way out I said goodbye to Luch. Like everybody else in this chamber, when we said goodbye at the end of last year, I thought we were saying goodbye for a couple of months. I never thought that my passing reference and good wishes for the holiday season and Christmas would be the last time that I would see him. I remember, as the previous speaker did, when I was first elected. It was in 2016. It was one of those experiences. You're brought into the House of Representatives. You get shown by the Speaker the parading of the chamber. The enormity of the flowing eucalypt walls is overpowering. When I was talking to people, this fellow started chatting away to me and I asked politely, 'What's your job?' And he introduced himself: 'I'm Luch. I'm the guy who kind of runs the show.' From that moment on, he was not just charming, endearing and warm throughout my entire parliamentary service—iteration 1 and iteration 2—but a permanent fixture of this place. This institution will endure well beyond any of us. We are a temporary beings that come and go. We have the great privilege of representing electorates. The building itself, since 1988, has been a symbol of and a testament to our democracy. It's a symbol of what makes this country great. But sitting beneath the surface of the physical structure are the people who work in this building every day, who bring it to life. Luch was one of those people who bridged the divide between the perpetual and the temporary in this building, and who celebrated our great democracy. He was as much a part of the institution, and his commitment to the democracy that we all love and participate in was not just a temporary thing: it was enduring. To pass away at only 59 years of age really is one of the most devastating things, I'm sure, for him and his family because he gave his life over to service of our great Commonwealth and its democracy. He represented the best of the Public Service and particularly the Parliamentary Service. He was diligent, he was discreet, he was loyal and he was respectful. I never met a member in this place who ever had anything bad to say about him, only that he was ever anything other than entirely willing to support and assist with a complete blindness to party allegiances, responsibilities. As the old saying goes, no-one would ever know how he voted because he was there, he was always willing and he was always able to assist. So, in one sense, he lived his life through this building and through the success and the contributions of the members, and that's why there's so much emotion from so many members in response to his tragic passing at such a young age. I was on Annabel Crabb's documentary The House, which stepped through how parliament itself works. In one sense, Luch was the embodiment of the parliament itself and how it, at least in spirit, wanted to operate—cooperative, engaging and focused squarely on the best interests of the people of Australia, lived out through the parliamentarians who have the great privilege of serving here. So I fully understand why everybody is so emphatic and warm in their acknowledgement of Luch and his legacy to this place. I can't even imagine the devastation that his family must feel for his early passing, and we can only express on behalf of all members the most incredible outpouring of grief and support for them at this very difficult time. But they should also take comfort that a life well lived in service of others is one of the greatest contributions that anybody can make. And he did that perhaps not in the way that many members in this House do—through their performative dimensions—but with a quiet and enduring resilience to support others to do their best to serve the community as part of the achievement of this great Commonwealth. That's why his life and legacy are such an achievement and why so many of us are so impassioned to acknowledge his life and legacy. We just want to wish his family all the best. May he rest in peace, because his legacy most resolutely endures.
Goldstein Electorate: Awards and Honours | Statements by Members | House debates
The Goldstein medal acknowledges the incredible efforts of so many young residents in the Goldstein community who embody the values of their school, stand up and take responsibility and most...
The Goldstein medal acknowledges the incredible efforts of so many young residents in the Goldstein community who embody the values of their school, stand up and take responsibility and most importantly show leadership at a young age. We established the medal in 2016 to acknowledge young Australians in our community who stand up and take responsibility for themselves and others, but more importantly it's a pathway to recognise them and encourage them to keep going. Of course the Goldstein medal is named after the electorate's namesake, Vida Goldstein, who was a suffragist who stood up for the right of women to vote, to buy property and to enter marriages in the same terms as men. Last year we had an incredible array of local students who got the Goldstein medal: Abby Larsen of Beaumaris North Primary School; Zoe Bond of Beaumaris Primary School; Ruth Sharma of Bentleigh West Primary School; Allie Howard from Black Rock Primary School; Rose Muirhead of Brighton Beach Primary School; Anastasia Tsikaris of Caulfield Primary School; Gabriella Perdikis from Caulfield South Primary School; Julian Tyler of Caulfield South Primary School; Frank Bokser of Gardenvale Primary School; Isla Fox of Hampton Primary School; Joanna Szeto of McKinnon Primary School; Chloe Lightfoot of Moorabbin Primary School; Lachlan Warfe at Ormond Primary School; Milla Bade of Sacred Heart Parish School; Scarlett Williams of Sandringham East Primary School; Darcy Tolmer of Sandringham Primary School; Jack Askew of Southmoor Primary School; Leona Cunningham of St Catherine's Moorabbin; Skye Pullman of St James Catholic Primary School; Freya Bradley of St Leonard's College, primary; James Lockhart of Stella Maris Catholic Primary School; Zoe Eccles of Tucker Road Bentleigh Primary School; Lily Gorvett-Page of Beaumaris Secondary College; Isabella Kyrebel of Brighton Secondary College; Mary Lazar of Firbank Grammar School, secondary; Maleesha Dharmadasa of McKinnon Secondary College; Sarina Azad of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College Bentleigh; Holly Turner of Sandringham College; Patrick Wilson of St Leonard's College, secondary; Keira Kinsella of Star of the Sea College; Richard Gomes of Haileybury college, primary; Bella Yap of Haileybury college, primary; Mona Bachmann of Kilvington Grammar School, primary; Henry Duncan of Kilvington Grammar School, secondary; and Christine Vrahnas of Cheltenham Secondary College. We got through them all, Deputy Speaker! They're all of diverse backgrounds. They've all made an incredible contribution to our community, and, more than anything else, they have embodied the values and the ideals that sit behind the Goldstein medal—that no matter your age you can show responsibility and you can show leadership to inspire others to do good in this world. I want to say to all the recipients: congratulations on what you have done; congratulations on what you are doing and what is yet to be done.
National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Bill 2026, National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
There is no ambiguity about the support that I would hope comes from all members of this chamber on the importance of making sure the next generation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander...
There is no ambiguity about the support that I would hope comes from all members of this chamber on the importance of making sure the next generation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children has the same economic opportunities and advancement that every other Australian child has. We want them to go on and get a good education, to grow up in a healthy and safe environment and, more importantly, to then mature in a way that enables them to live out the best of their lives. There are many institutions that seek to do exactly that, from the many social support organisations in cities and rural and regional areas throughout schooling—I know this has been a big focus of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander policy for a long time. In fact, without wanting to verbal him, my good friend Mick Gooda says that if we do something to make sure we address the challenges of the next generation—even if it means recognising the limitations of what we can do today for those alive—we will materially improve the future for all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people hereafter. I agree; he is a good friend of mine. The Tudor family established the Melbourne Indigenous Transition School to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children have a pathway to live the best of the opportunities of our country. That is central, but one of the things that's clear is that the best way to deliver change, the best way to advance the interests of the next Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander generation, is to work on the ground and in the community. The thing that disappoints me about these bills, the National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Bill 2026, and the National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026, is that—as with so many of the things this government seeks to do—they create another bureaucracy. Rather than looking at empowerment in the community, they look at how they can impose another central, big-government, big-Canberra solution on communities that need to be built from the ground up. That's the challenge so many of us have with these bills. We know the data and the consequences of decades of Canberra thinking it can tell Indigenous communities how they should live their lives and imposing solutions on them rather than empowering them. We know full well that there's already a commissioner for children at the Human Rights Commission. I have served as Australia's Human Rights Commissioner. There is already a commissioner responsible for children. There is already a commissioner for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. These bills are some sort of admonishment, saying they're not doing their job. They are. They're working as hard and as diligently as possible. But we know that we have to support community based solutions to empower communities, rather than support Canberra to impose its solution without any sense of direction or clarity about how to improve people's lives. If this government was really serious about improving the welfare of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, particularly in community, it would revisit its demonisation and targeting of the healthy welfare card, which went a long way to stopping the abuse of alcohol within communities. It is particularly setting children up for failure right from the outset because of the spread of fetal alcohol syndrome. Unfortunately, this government's record on these issues is not as good as it would like it to be. There's a reason there are still so many problems around closing the gap for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. Let's be under no ambiguity about this: it is a disgrace that we still have the scale of the gap that exists for our Indigenous and First Nations people. We absolutely should want them to live out their best lives. But when the government deliberately strips apart a pathway to stop the abuse of alcohol and drugs within a community, without any recognition of how it harms those most vulnerable, it has its priorities wrong. It cannot be solved through the imposition of a new commissioner or a new bureaucracy from Canberra thinking they know best or there is a better way they can impose on community. That's the challenge of this bill. It doesn't create the structural solutions that we need—
Small Business | Private Members' Business | House debates
I move: That this House: (1) condemns the Government for presiding over the insolvency of 41,749 small businesses since being elected;...
I move: That this House: (1) condemns the Government for presiding over the insolvency of 41,749 small businesses since being elected; (2) notes that: (a) 2025 was the worst calendar year for business insolvencies since records began in 1999, with more than 14,649 businesses collapsing; and (b) this Prime Minister now has the worst record of any Prime Minister for business insolvencies with an average of 2,938 businesses going under each quarter; (3) further condemns the Government for its failure to recognise the scale of the small business crisis and its lack of urgency in responding to record insolvencies; (4) acknowledges that behind every insolvency statistic is a family, an employee and a local community bearing the cost of the Government's policy failures; and (5) calls on the Minister for Small Business to urgently review the Government's policy settings that are focused on increasing costs, complexity and uncertainty for small and family businesses. Small business, family business, sole traders and the self-employed are the backbone of the Australian economy. They're more than just that, though. They are the people who stand up and back themselves to be able to get ahead to support themselves and their families. They are the employers of the nation. They are the people who take risks and who should enjoy the reward and responsibility that comes with those risks. But we know very well that things are not alright in the land of small business. Under the Albanese government, we have seen the highest number of small business insolvencies on record. We have seen 41,000 small businesses go insolvent under the Albanese government. Last year, we had the highest number of small business insolvencies in Australia's history on record. Never have more small businesses collapsed than under this government, and it's pretty clear the reason why. We have a cost of small business crisis in this country. We've had recent data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics which clearly shows that, as a consequence of government spending, inflation is out of control. So many small businesses rely on loans to be able to manage their liquidity or to buy assets, and interest rates are going up. A lot of them depend on non-bank lenders, so they pay a higher rate because they have a lower level of security; therefore, they are doubly impacted every time inflation persists and interest rates go up. But it's not just that they deal with the consequences of state taxes. Increasingly, state taxes are indexed against inflation. So when inflation goes up, their tax bill goes up as well—in addition to the problems of industrial relations, inflation that this government has legislated. And make no mistake, this government has put in a series of measures over the past three years which are still going through our industrial relations landscape, which are making it more expensive, more complex and harder to employ Australians. So if you've got a growing small business, you'll be finding it harder to employ the people you need to be successful and you'll have to pay a higher price. And every single one of these costs is not picked up by some small business owner; it has to be passed on to the consumer. And while large businesses enjoy the benefits of scale and can defray these costs across millions of items, small businesses get exposed at the pinch point of the Australian economy, and they're the ones most likely to feel the consequences and, tragically, as we know, have collapsed. Now, when we confronted the minister about this only last week in the parliament, she said that maybe those businesses were 'dodgy'. That is the level of empathy from this government towards people who have lost their livelihoods—you're a bit 'dodgy'. That's the attitude of the Albanese government and the Minister for Small Business—no empathy, no concern. But what they did want to do was cover their tracks, because once she was caught out with her interjection in accusing businesses that had collapsed of being 'dodgy', she gave the middle finger, frankly, to millions of Australians who have backed themselves and who now know they can't rely on their government. We need to make change in this country because we have, of a program that has been introduced by this government, only one-fifth or thereabouts of the total funding being accessed, because small businesses don't need more bureaucracy; small businesses need a lifeline of support, and they are being choked by the Albanese government because of inflation, interest rates and higher costs. What we need now more than ever are small business, family business, sole traders and the self-employed having the back of their government. We in this parliament need to stand up for small business, family business, sole traders and the self-employed and back them in because they are the employers of the nation. We need to stand with small businesses and stand up for their right to be successful and to prosper. They have a right to their profitability and we need to encourage them to pursue it, because the next generation of Australians are going to grow their wealth and their economic opportunity by backing themselves. The consequence, if we do that, will be a thriving economy made up of those people who chance their hand, take a risk and back themselves. The consequence if we don't do that is what we are living with right now: rising costs, businesses collapsing—and, with them, private jobs—and a private-sector employment crisis.
Iran: Human Rights | Private Members' Business | House debates
I'm happy to support the spirit of this motion. It isn't just a motion about our solidarity with the people of Iran; it's also about our solidarity with all people everywhere who want to live in...
I'm happy to support the spirit of this motion. It isn't just a motion about our solidarity with the people of Iran; it's also about our solidarity with all people everywhere who want to live in freedom and safety, avoiding the tyranny of extremism, Islamic extremism, and oppression as occurs under the IRGC in Iran. You just need to look at some pretty brutal realities. We currently have tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people on the streets of Iran standing up for a basic thing, which is their right to be able to determine their own future, to be able to make a choice about how they are going to live out their lives free from the oppression of the government that wants to impose a radical form of religious theocracy to enforce people to conform. We know what happens to women; we know what happens to homosexuals; we know what happens to other minority groups. And it's not just those groups as the IRGC seek to export their terrorism around the world. We've seen, in the case of Australia, where they have financed directly and engaged in state-sponsored terrorism against synagogues in Melbourne. We also know they have a direct connection with the illegal tobacco trade, which they used to finance attacks on our soil. Tragically, some government policies assist them in that process of profiteering from the practice, to use it to promote things like antisemitism and violence against Australians of Jewish heritage. We know the consequences that have befallen the people who have chosen to stand up against the mullahs in Tehran; 30,000 odd people have been reported. We know full well that they continue to target people, shut down pathways to communicate with the rest of the world and stop us all bearing witness to the horrors of the IRGC. What's tragic about this situation, more than anything else, is we have known for a long time that this situation would come. We know the IRGC simply takes power through force, and that's why we wanted to list them as a terrorist organisation in the last term of parliament. I remember when I was involved in the listing of Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organisations, it was a relatively straightforward process. To this day, it is still distressing that it took the firebombing of synagogues, sponsored by the Iranian government, for our government to act and acknowledge the IRGC and its state-sponsored terrorism as a threat, not just to Australia but to the international community. Now we face a choice about how we're going to respond. We know that this challenge is going to be one where we have to stand by the Iranian people at every step. Last week I stood on the steps of Parliament House and spoke at a protest. I spoke specifically about how disappointing it is that so many people who used to flood the capital cities of our nation for the victims of the Israel Hamas conflict—one where terrorist organisations attack the free state and then that free state chooses to respond to defend their citizens. And make no mistake: all civilian deaths are a tragedy; it does not matter the context in which it occurred. I spoke about how so many of those people went out into the streets and stood up for the civilian victims of Gaza—and fair enough, they have every right to do so—yet we have seen a conspicuous conspiracy of silence from the same core group within the community about the 30,000 people who have been murdered by the IRGC in Iran. They have not stood up for the people of Iran, and we need to call this out because it highlights the double standard and Jew hatred that occurs within some sections of the community if they won't stand up against the oppression of the Iranian people. Now is the time people are rising up and now is the time that we must stand by them. We must, of course, support them in their actions as much as possible and give them comfort and hope. And to those people in Australia who have family members on the frontline standing up against the Iranian government, you have our sympathy and our support. I've had people from the Iranian community in Goldstein, as well as from across the country, contact me and say, 'Please keep speaking up on this, because it matters to the people behind the Tehran curtain.' Now is the time for us to stand up and to be called to account; now is the time for all of us to show solidarity where it belongs. The consequence, if the Iranian people are successful—and of course we always look for opportunities where we can intervene to support them in achieving their shared objective of self-determination—is we will have an Iran that is free of the mullahs and their tyrannical regime, a world where we're less likely to have radical extremist ideology that seeks to oppress people and less state-sponsored terrorism in Iran, in the region and around the world. But if we fail, we know there will be a perpetuation of those terrors and those horrors on the people who have done nothing more than want to stand up and say they want their voice, their freedom, and to decide their future.
Jones, Ms Bianca Adrienne, Morton-Bowles, Ms Holly Jayne | Adjournment | House debates
There are a number of times in this chamber when you have to give speeches that you don't want to give, and today, unfortunately, is one of those cases. As you may recall, Speaker, in November...
There are a number of times in this chamber when you have to give speeches that you don't want to give, and today, unfortunately, is one of those cases. As you may recall, Speaker, in November 2024 there were the tragic deaths of two young Australians in Laos: Bianca Jones and Holly Morton-Bowles. These two young girls, with four others, had methanol poisoning at the prime of their lives, when they had just finished school and gone for a holiday to Laos to celebrate the fresh chapter in their lives. It ended in tragedy through methanol poisoning. As difficult as, of course, it was at that time for the families, tragically I have to say that their trauma lives on because of the consequences of the failure and injustice that we have seen and we are experiencing. To the families—Samantha Morton, Shaun Bowles and Mark and Michelle Jones—we send our love. Unfortunately, today there have been media reports that the families have since found out that justice has not been delivered at all. Instead, secret court cases have been held in Laos, which led, on 29 January this year, to 10 people receiving an utterly irrelevant pittance of a fine, equivalent to A$185, for these deaths. As the families have rightly outlined, this is insulting. Even worse than that, it's made an unbearable grief even worse. For these families, who have already lived such a tragic loss, to now have to continue to fight for basic justice for their lost loved ones is so difficult. I say without any sense of partisanship but with extreme disappointment that the families found out about these secret court cases through a British family, because they were not kept informed by the Australian government. Let's be very clear about this: this is a failure of the Australian government to keep these families informed of the path for justice. We know they had a reasonable expectation not just to bring those who perpetrated this crime to justice but more importantly—because it's also about protecting the lives of other young Australians and others—to ensure the situation is not repeated. Secret court cases and $185 fines for the loss of six lives at such a young and tender age are nothing short of disgraceful, but it's also disgraceful that our government has not lived up to its obligations and kept the families informed and that the families have had to find out through other routes. So I'm simply requesting of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and of the government that they tell the Australian people and the parliament what their diplomatic efforts have been with the Laotian government, including the requests to any foreign authorities and the avenues they've pursued; that they ensure appropriate communication with the Laotian government for justice, because this should not be the end; that we ensure someone is charged with the deaths of Bianca Jones and Holly Morton-Bowles, as should be the case; and that the families receive all the support they need, including being kept informed by the Australian government, as we should all expect. This is not an unreasonable request from the families. This evening, I spoke to Mark Jones about raising this matter in parliament because I was so disappointed and so saddened, as the family is, with the consequences of the decisions of the secret court cases. Now is a time that the families rightly expect to be kept informed by the Australian government and to be kept informed not just of what has been done but, more importantly, of what steps are now going to be taken through consular and diplomatic efforts to provide a sense of closure to the matter for justice and for the families. In that context, Speaker, I seek leave to table the letter I have sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Penny Wong. Leave not granted.
Small Business | Motions | House debates
I move: That so much that the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Goldstein moving the following motion immediately: That this House: (1) notes that: (a)...
I move: That so much that the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Goldstein moving the following motion immediately: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) during the matter of public importance discussion on 5 February 2026, the Minister for Small Business suggested that the 33,426 small businesses which have closed under the Government did so because "maybe they were dodgy"; and (b) the Minister for Small Business told the House she would take the opportunity to correct the record about these disgraceful comments but that she is yet to do so; and (2) therefore, requires the Minister for Small Business to present a formal apology in the House, apologising to the thousands of small business owners and their staff whom she slandered, before the House rises today. We know very well we are all sitting here during the matter of public importance last week, when the Minister for Small Business, in response to talking about the 40,000 small businesses that have gone insolvent under this government, said, 'Maybe they were dodgy.' Never has there been a more contemptuous response from the Minister for Small Business—the person whose job it is in this parliament to advocate for their interests—to slur and denigrate them and the hard work of Australians who are standing up and fighting for the future of not just themselves, their families, their communities but the millions of people who work for small business all across this country. We are at a crossroads as a country. We have a private employment crisis in Australia right now. The government is responsible for eight in 10 jobs either being created directly or indirectly because we are seeing such a crisis in confidence in private investment and private employment. What we have now, when those businesses are trying to get ahead, when they're drowning under the problems and the pressure of inflation, is nothing but contempt from the Albanese government. To say to people who have saved and sacrificed to get themselves into a position to support themselves—who have done the hard work and are making sure they can employ millions of Australians—'maybe they're dodgy' shows a shocking level of contempt from this government and this minister in response to the importance of small business. The crisis small business in this country is facing right now directly correlates to the problems of inflation. We just heard the Treasurer throughout the entirety of question time continuously saying that there was no correlation between private demand and government expenditure. We heard from the minister and the Treasurer dismissing the problems of inflation and the impact they are having on the small businesses, family businesses, sole traders and self-employed. But the Reserve Bank Governor last Friday, in answer to the question from the member for Cook—and congratulations to him on asking incisive questions in the House of Representatives economics committee—very clearly drew the correlation between public expenditure, inflation and how that is putting upward pressure on interest rates. This is particularly important because we have so many small businesses that borrow to manage their challenges of liquidity. We have so many small businesses that borrow to raise the capital they need to invest in their own future and to be able to buy the assets they need. And, of course, we know right now that that future is being compromised while the Treasurer floats out options of getting rid of the capital gains discount, as a consequence compromising future investment in this country. But, even worse than that, so many of those small businesses, because they have to back themselves with money that they borrow from the security they put in their own private home, risk their own future to give a better future to others, often have to go to non-bank lenders and end up paying a higher interest rate than the standard retail rate that so many Australian households pay. So, when interest rates go up and inflation goes up, small business is hit multiple times over. They are also facing a cost-of-business crisis because all those costs that are increasing as a consequence of inflation are going through small businesses. Large businesses and big corporates can shed those costs across millions of units that are moved. Small businesses are fully exposed and have one choice: pass them on to their customers. And, when they pass those costs onto their customers, people make choices and vote with their feet when households are already struggling so much about how they're going to keep their head above the rising inflationary water of the Albanese government. So they have a cost-of-business inflation crisis, but then they have the cost of inflation on taxation arrangements. Deputy Speaker Chesters, coming from the great state of Victoria, you would know that, increasingly, state governments tie their tax rates to inflation and to CPI. So, when inflation goes up, tax rates go up, and who do Labor state governments make sure they target more than anybody? It is always small businesses who are trying to get ahead and employ the future generation of Australians. So inflation is going up, interest rates are going up, and the cost of taxation inflation is going up, and that's before we've even got to the problems of industrial relations inflation. Many of the different pieces of legislation in the last term of parliament are still washing through our industrial relations and employment landscape. When those costs get passed through, it means higher costs for small business, who are being crushed by the consequences of the Albanese government, and they haven't stopped. They've passed legislation for multi-employer bargaining, and now that is slowly trickling its way through our employment and industrial relations landscape. We have unions deliberately going out and finding ways to leverage costs and to make it more expensive to hire tradies and contract workers, and where does that land? It increases the costs of things like housing and construction. That hits small businesses and first home buyers, and it means the costs are flowing through to every single Australian. So we have inflation costs, interest rate costs, industrial relations inflation and tax inflation all going up because this Labor government has lost control of the books. This Labor government continues to borrow from tomorrow with debt spending to fuel inflation today, to cover their employment and private sector investment crisis. There has to be a point where this government understands the damage it has done. But you won't see it from the Minister for Small Business, who has overseen the highest number of small business insolvencies in Australian history, on record. Their response in this House last week was to say: Maybe they were dodgy. This is the problem. After we gave that speech and a number of members constantly repeated it, she got up in this chamber and claimed, or started to claim anyway, that that was not what was said. She claimed she was verballed. Well, there's just one problem—and I can't table this document, because it's already a public one—which is the Hansard caught her interjection and exposed that she had said what she had said. Even more than that, she then tried to mislead the House to cover her tracks. She knows her shameful record. She knows the shameful record of the Albanese government—we all do—but the problem is small businesses in Australia are living it, and more importantly the insolvent small businesses are living it right now. People have lost their futures, lost their jobs, lost their livelihoods and are increasingly finding it challenging to get back up on their feet and start again. This is the legacy of this Labor government. They have no empathy and no concern or consideration for the small businesses that want to get ahead. This Labor government has absolute contempt for those people who stand up and back themselves to get ahead, and they do so for one simple reason: they can't control them. The modern Labor Party has one objective: maintain control over the lives of Australians. One of the things they don't like about small businesses is they're fierce, they're independent, they stand on their own two feet, they back themselves, they don't look for handouts, they make sure that they fight for their own futures, and they take agency and control of their own destiny. Nothing terrifies the modern Labor Party more than Australians standing on their own two feet and not simply being dependent on the government when they can control them. That's why we on this side of the House stand up so clearly for small business. That's why every single member here understands that backing small business is not just backing people who are standing up to be able to get ahead; it's backing communities. It's backing the people on the front lines who support our local sporting groups and charitable organisations. When they go under, our social fabric is torn in the process. You should understand this, Deputy Speaker Chesters, coming from a regional electorate. Small business is on the front line, and that's why we have to back them every step of the way. I can sure as hell say that is not what we're getting from the Albanese government.
Small Business | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Treasury has said the small-business incentive has failed, with a 23 per cent take up rate. Meanwhile, last year we had the highest number of small-business...
My question is to the Prime Minister. Treasury has said the small-business incentive has failed, with a 23 per cent take up rate. Meanwhile, last year we had the highest number of small-business insolvencies on record, with 41,000 collapsing under your tenure. In response to that, the Minister for Small Business mocked and ridiculed those losing their livelihoods and called them 'dodgy'. Does the Prime Minister support the Minister for Small Business's disgraceful slur that insolvent small-business owners are 'dodgy'?
Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025, Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I can suspend at any time, Deputy Speaker.
Sorry, Deputy Speaker, but we haven't commenced with a speaker.
I move that so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent me from moving the following motion immediately: That the House (1) notes that, during the...
I move that so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent me from moving the following motion immediately: That the House (1) notes that, during the matter-of-public-importance discussion on 5 February 2026, the Minister for Small Business suggested that 33, 426 small—
Goldstein Electorate: Infrastructure | Constituency Statements | House debates
After the 2022 election the federal Labor government ripped $100 million of infrastructure funding out of the Goldstein community for worthy and important projects, particularly those to promote...
After the 2022 election the federal Labor government ripped $100 million of infrastructure funding out of the Goldstein community for worthy and important projects, particularly those to promote our use of public transport and to green our community. It was devastating because that money then had to be filled by councils—who simply don't have the resources—when federal Labor came after Bayside and Glen Eira's cash. As a consequence, we have less community infrastructure in Goldstein than we need, particularly a lot of sporting facilities that simply don't have the changing room facilities for women to be able to play games like sport and cricket. I can't believe that a federal Labor government, with a choice between its priorities chooses to take back money from the community, from women's cricket and women's footy and other important social infrastructure. Despite $100 million being ripped out of the Goldstein community, the then member simply waved it through. Well, in the 2025 election the community made a different choice, which was to make sure they had a member who stood here in Canberra and fought for the community and for the infrastructure. That's why we submitted a community budget submission to the budget process. I implore the federal Treasurer to start to return some of the $100 million for the community that we desperately need, because our community budget submission steps through some really basic information. The federal Labor government provided an MRI licence to Sandringham Hospital, but what they haven't got at Sandringham Hospital is an MRI machine. In fact, from freedom of information documents, the community has been engaged in a hoax by this federal Labor government, claiming that services would be available to them which were not delivered, because they didn't have the equipment to do so. The first thing we ask for is around three million bucks so we have an MRI machine for a community hospital. We know of the rise of antisemitism over the past couple of years. How about we get the community safety grants our community needs for Moorabbin Hebrew Congregation, L'Chaim Chabad youth centre and the South Caulfield Hebrew Congregation. For women's sporting facilities, as I said already, there's Peterson Reserve, Brighton Beach Oval Pavillion and Dendy Park Pavilion—so women can have toilets and change rooms. We need them in Highett, we need them at Brighton Beach, and we need them at Dendy Park. We need other important facilities, like for victims of sexual violence and those on low incomes who need support, like the redevelopment of BayCISS community support centre, as well as many other important pieces of infrastructure, like the EMC Fox Pavilion in McKinnon, which also needs women's change room facilities, park lighting upgrades at Allnutt Park and Hodgson Reserve and, of course, an open amenity in Glen Huntly. We should be able to support important infrastructure like Moorabbin Bowls Club. These are simple requests. Treasurer: deliver, because Goldstein is depending on it.
Economy | Matters of Public Importance | House debates
This exposes the underbelly and the motivation of this government. There is a pure contempt for those people who make the effort, strive and back themselves to the point where they create...
This exposes the underbelly and the motivation of this government. There is a pure contempt for those people who make the effort, strive and back themselves to the point where they create opportunities not just for themselves but for others. The response from the minister—we just heard it in the chamber, and then she defended her comment—was, 'Maybe they were dodgy.' The simple, broad-brush allegations and criticism of small business—the demonisation of small businesses—because of the attitude of this government are why we have seen record insolvencies. Now is the time when those small businesses and those households need Australians to back them. They need this parliament to back them, but the contempt that we have from the minister shows something entirely different. That is why Australians are feeling the very real consequences of inflation and declining standards of living. Today we heard direct warnings that inflation was going to continue to eat into the wealth of Australian households. People are going to have lower standards of living, less capacity to support their families, less capacity to go and employ others—all under this government. We have had a record of economic vandalism par excellence if you call that a standard under the Albanese government. We've had Labor's economic vandalism, where households are now paying 16 per cent more for food, 18 per cent more for health, 22 per cent more for rents, 39 per cent more for insurance and nearly 40 per cent more for electricity, and every one of those costs—every single one of those price rises—goes to a small business, eats into their profit margins and increases their capacity to find their way to the ATO and ASIC to the point of insolvency. Why would a government be so proud of shutting down the pathways for Australians? We are in the business of backing small businesses to open their doors, to welcome their customers and to grow the opportunity in the economic base of our country. Any government, state or federal—the Albanese government in particular—that looks at small business as simply an ATM to cover the costs that they face because they are unable to manage their reckless spending will continue to drive small business to the wall. We know that is happening, because the analysis by the Australian Industry Group clearly shows eight in 10 jobs created in this country right now are coming from direct and indirect public expenditure. We have a crisis of collapse of private investment and private jobs, despite what the Prime Minister and the Treasurer say. The problem of inflation that we have in this country comes directly from fiscal recklessness. The Chalmers interest rate rise cycle has, sadly, only just begun. We have had quotes from the retail sector. We have had quotes from so many different people in the small business sector that they know how bad this is going to be and how Australian small businesses and households will pay. We need them to rein in their spending. People on the other side of the chamber often ask, 'Where are you going to see cuts?' I can tell you where we would cut expenditure: we would cut the cartel kickbacks that go to organised crime and to bikie gangs through the CFMEU and find their way into union coffers and into the coffers of the Australian Labor Party. I make no apology about that, because they are pushing up the cost of a new home for young Australians, they're pushing up construction costs and they're contributing to the problems of inflation. Now is the time that people and Australians are looking to this parliament to stand up and make decisions in the national interest. Now is the time that they're looking at how this parliament is going to back them to prosper and to grow, and instead they are seeing and hearing the sneers of the Minister for Small Business, saying things like, 'If a small business goes out of business, it must be because it is dodgy.' This is a disgrace, and it is nothing short of contempt. The minister can throw whatever barbs she wants, but I can tell you the small businesses of this country know exactly who is on their side. They know that the Liberal Party has always stood up proudly, backed them in and made sure the laws of this country say: 'Chance your hand. Go for your life. We back you because you back yourselves.' What they don't deserve is a prime minister and a minister for small business who punch down on them and try to deny them their economic opportunity and their pathway for growth. We back small business. They want to hate on them.
I will take the interjection from the Minister for Small Business, because what she said was, 'Maybe they were dodgy.' Just like the Treasurer, her response to the challenges Australian...
I will take the interjection from the Minister for Small Business, because what she said was, 'Maybe they were dodgy.' Just like the Treasurer, her response to the challenges Australian households and small businesses face is to punch down on Australians. This is not the type of country they want to be, and it is certainly not what they want to see from this parliament. Honourable members interjecting—
If you want to see the contempt that the Albanese government has for families, households and small businesses, you just need to see the arrogance of the Prime Minister in question time. Every...
If you want to see the contempt that the Albanese government has for families, households and small businesses, you just need to see the arrogance of the Prime Minister in question time. Every time we get up to ask a simple question about the survival of small businesses, he shuts down question time, and he has good reason to do so, because the simple reality is we had more small business insolvencies in the Commonwealth last year than we have had in Australian history. I hear the heckling from the Minister for Small Business on the other side of this chamber. I would be ashamed and embarrassed if I saw a record number of small businesses crushed under my administration, but the minister sits there peacocking, proudly saying that she is proud of her record, when she should be ashamed. Forty-thousand small businesses have been crushed into insolvency under the Albanese government. This is not something to be proud of. It is something to be embarrassed about and ashamed of, because sitting behind every one of those small businesses are the livelihoods, the incomes, the dignity and the pride of Australians backing themselves to get ahead. What they are living with right now is increased costs not just from the explicit increase in interest rates and inflation but from a cost-of-business crisis. Millions of Australian small businesses are struggling to keep their heads above the inflation water level. They are experiencing costs pushed down onto their small businesses, harming their profitability. This morning I met with people from the restaurant and food sector. Their profit margins have simply collapsed. The capacity for a small business to be opened to serve Australians has declined so much that one in nine Australian small businesses in the restaurant and hospitality sector has closed. It is an extraordinary record of this government and something that it should be ashamed of. But it's not just the inflation impact. With state governments indexing so many of their taxes to inflation, we're seeing a direct hit from increases in inflation, a second hit through interest rates, a third hit through the cost of taxation inflation and, in fact, a fourth hit directly as a consequence of the Labor government's industrial relations agenda, which is pushing on inflationary costs further for small business and making it harder not just for small businesses to get ahead but for households to stay ahead. So many are being pushed to the wall. What is going on with that? It isn't just a small business, as critical as that is. Sitting behind those millions of small businesses are employees—young Australians who are getting their first job, people who depend on small business for an income. When a small business collapses, the wage disappears. It seems like a simple truth, but, when you have a small business collapse, the jobs go with it. There are no taxes paid, there is no income and there is no super on a job that doesn't exist, and this is the lived reality under the Albanese government. We know that, as of 2 February of this year, 41,749 businesses have gone bust under the Albanese government. In construction, it's 10,757. It's 6,487 in accommodation and food services; 2,046 in manufacturing; 1,168 in health care or social assistance; 541 in agriculture, forestry and fisheries; and 406 in education and training. While the minister on the other side of the table likes to boast about her record, she cannot hide from some simple facts. The 33,426 fewer employing small businesses in Australia—
This is a message for all of the small and family businesses, the sole traders and the self-employed. We just want to say, 'Thank you, and keep going.' We know that you're suffering directly as a...
This is a message for all of the small and family businesses, the sole traders and the self-employed. We just want to say, 'Thank you, and keep going.' We know that you're suffering directly as a consequence of higher interest rates because the Albanese government can't control spending and is driving inflation. We know you're living the consequences of red-tape inflation going up and stifling your capacity to grow your business every day. You're living the consequences of industrial relations inflation, where the costs the government is trying to push onto you as an employer are making it harder and more complex to do simple things like pay your workers. Every step of the way, people in small business in this country are facing big challenges. That's why we have seen a record number of small businesses collapse under the Albanese government. Since the Albanese government was elected, 41,000 small businesses have disappeared through insolvency—and, with those, livelihoods. Last year alone, more than 14,000 small businesses went insolvent. It is a record for Australia, and it is not one that anybody should be proud of. This is the legacy of a reckless government that simply can't control its spending but can always find a way to get its hand and shove it into the pockets of households and small businesses. Now is the time for good people to stand up and call it out.
I think about the thousands of Australian university students who have committed themselves to three-year, four-year and five-year programs, wanting to build out the potential for their...
I think about the thousands of Australian university students who have committed themselves to three-year, four-year and five-year programs, wanting to build out the potential for their participation not just in the workforce but in contributing to human progress and human achievement. They go to tertiary institutions—in particular, universities, as I did—because they want to be embodied with knowledge, skills and purpose to be a much more significant contributor not just to themselves but to the wellbeing of the entire Australian community. When you talk to those students, so often they're looking for improvement in student outcomes and minimising the size of classrooms—which are chockers, because the universities have geared themselves towards the number of students they have who are full fee paying. There is an increasing number of students who go to university with low contact hours. Even worse than that—Deputy Speaker, you're one of the people who have gone through life, let's say, learning from street cred—is that so much of our system is geared towards qualification inflation. I know the government is addicted to inflationary forces. Well, qualification inflation is no different. We have seen over many years because of the efforts of Labor governments the diminishing value of a tertiary qualification which means that people need to get more in order to distinguish themselves, to demarcate themselves and to be able to get ahead. Look at all the problems that university students have right now. Look at the problems of what they want from their education, not only if they're going on a pathway of research and through the academic pathway but also if it's industrial or commercial or simply for their own satisfaction or achievement. What we are not seeing is vision from this government to unleash universities and their potential because their focus is squarely on how they feed those at the top. The Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025 and the associated bill are no different. The Australian Tertiary Education Commission is a bureaucratic solution about how more people are employed to sit over the top of policy when one of the biggest problems with universities right now is that they are completely top heavy. If we add bureaucracies on top of university administrations, where we have vice-chancellors earning in excess of the Prime Minister and everyone in this chamber, we won't be getting the focus and the resources to where we need them—learning, teaching and research. In fact, this bill does so little to advance learning, teaching and research it doesn't even mention them in the legislation. I'd say that's disappointing but, truthfully, it's an embarrassment. Universities need a vision. Universities need reform. They have forgotten their core purpose which is to make sure that they are there to advance the educational improvement, wellbeing and transfer of knowledge between generations. Instead, the incentives that have been put in place since the Hawke government have re-engineered them towards focusing their energies on their own self-sustainability rather than the outcomes. This is a perennial problem of so much of the legislation that this Labor government brings into this House. It is built from the proposition of intent. It is not focused on the outcome, particularly improving outcomes for young Australians to get the best standard of education that they so desperately need and, in addition to that, are paying for. What do we need? We don't need a plan for another bureaucracy. They can sell it under any banner they like. What we need is a plan and a vision for how we are going to improve our universities, unleash their potential and focus their efforts towards turning their primary research into something that is innovative, commercialisable for the human improvement of everybody and, more importantly, underpins the economic progress of what our country needs in the future, not more bureaucracy that gets in the way, that tries to impose solutions of Canberra's way. What we need is something that empowers universities to be part of and integrate into full component of the Australian economy. I hear this all the time. I was at a lunch recently for people who had just been elected to parliament recently—in my case, it was my second time round—with many Labor members of parliament with the Vice-Chancellor and various deputy vice-chancellors from Monash University. Their one message from that lunch was, 'Can the federal government and state government get out of our way and provide clarity and certainty so that we can attract the research funding and go on and do things like invest in the research potential around things like power, particularly nuclear power?' They have major international corporations like Rolls-Royce that are desperate to be able to invest in their research capacity, which could not only be a pathway for economic opportunities but also create jobs, and they are not getting it from Canberra nor Spring Street. In the face of that desperation for a pathway and for a point of clarity about how universities can build themselves to be able to be part of building Australia's next round of economic progress and growth and to be able to provide the research foundation to support students to be able to achieve they can do and to drive the process of scientific progress and human improvement, the answer from this federal government is silence and another bureaucracy to sit over the top of you, to impose the government's agenda and, when they're out of office, to front run the arguments about why they should be given more power. This comes to the fundamental proposition of some of the divide between those who sit on this side of the House and those who sit on that side of the House. We understand that the strength of our country does not come from Canberra and central authorities down or from organised capital. It comes from families and communities coming together to build the foundations and success of our great nation. One of the starting points of that is we desperately, desperately want students to be able to get good value and return on investment for their energy and, more importantly, not just their money but their time. Three years or four years of young Australians' time at university is a huge investment and risk for their future, and we want them to get maximum value for that, not simply be set up to feed the interests of the select few—the vice-chancellors on their big salaries and, of course, the academics that go on to become members of the National Tertiary Education Union, which is the constituency of this government. Bureaucracy is not an answer to human improvement. Success for us looks very clearly at how we are going to empower and enable and liberate Australia's students to be able to have a tertiary education that delivers for them, because the failure—and this is what we're going to get from this process—is more of the same, and that is currently failing Australian students under the Albanese Labor government.
Translating and Interpreting Services Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I'd like to follow on from the previous speaker by saying it's 100 per cent right that you do not need to speak full English to be a patriotic, committed, invested Australian. But, when it comes...
I'd like to follow on from the previous speaker by saying it's 100 per cent right that you do not need to speak full English to be a patriotic, committed, invested Australian. But, when it comes down to providing pathways so that people can be full participants in the Australian way of life, we know the foundations of people's language and capacity to communicate with their fellow citizens are not just something that is, frankly, desirable; they are also the pathway by which people can not just become citizens and full economic participants but, of course, also socially integrate into the rest of the country. We don't want to be a nation of enclaves. We want to be a nation of big citizens enlivened by their full participation in the rest of the community. That's the basis on which we're supporting the Translating and Interpreting Services Bill 2025, because we see the capacity for new Australians to become full participants in the Australian way of life as central to their success. We want them to succeed. That is why, of course, we had the Fraser government establish SBS many years ago. It made an investment in the future broadcasting potential of this country so that it didn't matter where you were, where you landed from and where, of course, you built a life in this country. You had not just a pathway to connect back to the knowledge and information that was available from your traditional homeland but, in addition to that, a clear pathway to English education and to becoming a full participant in the Australian way of life. That is liberalism lived large, and we want to see that at every point, because it's in the best interest of investing in our people. The legislation we're talking about here is nowhere near as grand as the great Liberal achievement of broadcasting for multicultural Australia. This is a much more technical one. But it still is part of making sure that, no matter how you came to this nation and whatever the cause, there's a pathway for you to have that sense of full citizenship. The previous speaker spoke particularly about those who go on the pathways of resettlement through migration programs, including refugees. These are often people who were displaced because of intolerable acts and prejudice and persecution in their homeland. What they are seeking when they seek a pathway for resettlement here in Australia is not just safety—although that is, of course, absolutely true—or avoiding refoulement—although that is also true. It is to then go on and build the foundations of a life where they can build and invest in their family, become economic participants and do things like establish small businesses. I know, Deputy Speaker Aldred, that with your past history at the Franchise Council you understand that new Australians are some of the biggest investors in small businesses, because they understand that that's the pathway for wealth and opportunity. That, of course, is why so many of them become horrified at how Labor seeks to demonise the self-employed, the small businesses and those who stand on their own two feet and why they see such common ground with the spirit of the speech which I give today, which I know that you and other members on the Liberal side, such as the member for Longman, share with me. The member for Longman fundamentally understands that full economic participation and small businesses are the foundation of our economic success—not just as individuals or families but as communities—and therefore also the pathway for our shared success as a nation. We know that TIS National has operated since the 1970s, and we know the important role that it plays. We know that it is an essential part of making sure that translation services through telephone operations can be central to every Australian being able to participate. Of course, this in itself is one of those great achievements that we have supported along the way for many years. What we want to do is continue to expand those services to make sure that they're contemporary and meet the challenges of the 21st century. We want to make sure that, if you make this nation your home, you have the resources and the capacity to live out your best life for yourself and your family. This is an important step. It's a central step because it speaks not just to the type of nation that we are, but, more importantly, to the type of nation that we want to be—a cohesive and connected one where people have a sense of equal dignity and understanding about who they are and what they want to achieve together. That's the basis on which I support this bill.
Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
Of course I welcome the pathway to be able to make sure that the financial instruments that Australians use on a day-to-day basis operate with the compliance and framework of law. So in seeking,...
Of course I welcome the pathway to be able to make sure that the financial instruments that Australians use on a day-to-day basis operate with the compliance and framework of law. So in seeking, in the loose terms of the spirit of this law, to support it, I welcome the fact that the government is finally taking steps to bring about a legal framework to include cryptocurrencies and the sorts of digital assets that we need to be part of not just a modern economy but the global economy. It has taken the government an incredibly long period of time to get here, and I know their agenda has been incredibly detailed and complicated in so many different areas, of which not a single one I can name. But that's probably a reflection of the busy work and fights that go on between the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. We nonetheless welcome the pathway that they're providing for a framework for cryptocurrencies. Fair enough too. When I look at cryptocurrencies—I've always been a bit of a sceptic not from a sense of opposition but from a sense of, 'What's the underlying value?' I'm in the Warren Buffett camp at the end of the day, if it's productive capacity in use. But one thing I have always given credit to cryptocurrencies for is that I think that they're a hedge against inflation and expansive monetary policy from central banks—entities that I am not very trusting of because they have successively and consistently got decisions wrong, which has led to what we now have to acknowledge is the Chalmers rate-rise cycle. We had, of course, one interest rate rise yesterday off the back of shocking inflation data. But we know this is not going to be the end. So long as you have expansive fiscal policy—borrowing from the future for debt spending for today to cover up on the economic mismanagement of this government—Australians will be at risk of higher inflation and higher interest rates. We're a stand-out, but for all the wrong reasons, on a global scale around interest rates. It's directly connected to decisions by state and federal governments who simply want to cover up for their economic mismanagement by borrowing more money so that they don't have to acknowledge that they're strangling the private sector of the economy. So the one thing I will say at the moment is that I'm afraid crypto probably is—and this is general advice, not financial advice—good value in hedging against the economic tyranny of the Albanese government, because the Chalmers rate-rise cycle has only just begun and there will be much more of it yet to come. I say that with sadness, because there's nothing Australians can afford less right now, after they've paid their Christmas credit-card-debt bill and are paying for school fees, uniforms and all the other costs that come with the new school year. The worst thing they could have had yesterday was an interest rate rise, and unfortunately, under the Chalmers rate-rise cycle, you should fully accept that that's not going to be the end of the matter. But that's not what this bill, the Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025, addresses. What it does do, though, is to give a legal framework, a pathway, for Australians—young, old and everything in between—to invest, as they see fit, complying with law. We welcome that, because there are a lot of issues that a lot of people who invested in crypto earlier, before this legislative framework, had. There were big grey areas around the property rights underlying their investments, the legality of them, the transferability of them and their capacity to seek redress, and there are lots of the more complicated things that flow on, for instance, from capital gains tax. We, on this side of the chamber, have always understood how important it is to get this framework right. That's why Senator Bragg did an outstanding job leading a parliamentary inquiry to look at how we take the grey into the light. The government has picked up significant parts of Senator Bragg's efforts and passed them off as their own homework. We still, ultimately, welcome the effort—even if there isn't the acknowledgement and we're seeing the government trying to pretend that they have somehow invented this work. But we can understand why the Labor Party took so long to introduce this legislation, because, at every point, we know, the cartel relationships that operate between the Labor Party, the trade unions and the industry super funds are a giant money-laundering operation, and of course one of the problems with crypto is that it sits outside of the frames of legality. So I imagine that a large part of the reason why it's taken so long is that they've been desperately trying to figure out how they can extract, from crypto, cartel kickbacks to the CFMEU, to go into the slush funds of the Labor Party and the trade union movement and perhaps other funds as well. It continues to be a criminal activity, but, unfortunately, when we know that Australian taxpayers' money has flown into organised crime and bikie gangs, courtesy of state and federal Labor governments, there is a moral evil here that must be expunged. And, until we remove this government, crypto, traditional assets and your tax dollars will not be safe. No Australians' assets will be safe until we remove this government. We're supportive of the principle of this bill and what it's seeking to achieve. But the government, in their way, can't help but go off and refer things to different agencies like ASIC. As to ASIC and having oversight of ASIC, let's be polite and say that, at times, calamity follows and there's their complete incapacity or unwillingness to regulate certain sections of the market—let alone the absence of the knowledge, capacity or skill. We have recommended that this bill go off to a committee because we believe that it is deficient, we're not convinced ASIC can do the job that's been charged to them and there's a serious need for further work to be done. But we'll see on that. There's the spirit of the bill, but the practical application of it is something we're going to have to not just revisit through the committee process but continue to revisit into the future, because the cost of getting this wrong is serious. We know full well that, if we have crypto in a legal framework that encourages investment, it could be part of capital flows that can invest in the future of this country, and we can increase the economic opportunity that every Australian enjoys. The failure is what is happening right now, where people are investing offshore and Australians are disconnected from the opportunities of crypto. Now, I understand why a lot of Australians are—and only the other day I had a constituent say that they are—moving their capital offshore, because of the approach of this Labor government, and moving it to foreign jurisdictions, in a legal way. And this is now a very common story. We're seeing the same thing in the UK, where Labor governments think they can somehow tax people into prosperity, where they can tax people to the point they'll look for foreign jurisdictions, where they're taxed out of their patriotism. That is exactly what is happening under this government—that we're all becoming poorer as a nation. And, of course, crypto provides a very fast pathway to do that, and that is what we're now staring down—the risk of capital outflows from this country because Labor can't manage the budget. They're exposing Australians to inflation. That means higher interest rates. That means that, as part of the Chalmers' rate-rise cycle, Australians will get poorer and will be taxed out of their patriotism. This is a time when we need laws that design and protect people's assets and Australians are encouraged to keep their money onshore, investing in the future of this nation—not part of the cartel kickback corruption cycle that has so fanned under this government and state Labor governments and is core to the corrupt system that sits at the heart of the modern Labor Party.
Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I thank the member for Wannon for his enthusiasm at the opportunity to listen to a speech characteristically to legislation before the House from the member for Goldstein—of course,...
I thank the member for Wannon for his enthusiasm at the opportunity to listen to a speech characteristically to legislation before the House from the member for Goldstein—of course, certainly better than the predecessor member for Goldstein, I'm sure, on the subject matter of which he is humbly agreeing with as well. The point of this legislation, of course, as was mentioned by the previous speaker, is straightforward, but we need to acknowledge it sits in a much broader context about the health care of this nation. We all have a natural interest in having a sustainable health system for our country. Doing so is one that supports the workers to be able to go on and deliver the primary care they need in community, and that's of critical importance. One of the things that COVID demonstrated or revealed to all of us is the health inequity that exists across our country around access to services between not just rural and regional areas but also affluent and less affluent parts of capital cities. In a moment of crisis, when people need care, it's explicitly revealed to the whole of the nation. The question is how you seek to address that and make sure that the system is sustainable and gives people the support that they need. What we've heard from this government to date around health care has been principally, as they hold up their Medicare cards, that everybody can go to the doctor for allegedly free. I now see the television propaganda that has been pushed out by this government to try and reinforce their political messaging. The problem is anybody who has actually gone and visited a doctor. And let's start with the ACT, which is not my constituency, and I can assure you it probably never will be. But, as people who live in the ACT said to me only the other day, there are no bulk-billed doctors in the ACT, the heart of this nation politically. Surely, if the government is going to achieve its objective anywhere, it is here. Yet there are no bulk-billed doctors in this capital city for people. So, if you're low income, you're not getting support. You're a pensioner who doesn't have the financial means and resources to be able to pay. So, despite the bluster and the rhetoric and the holding up of the Medicare card and waving it around and all of the other rubbish that the Prime Minister goes on about, it is not being lived by Australians. A Medicare card comes with a credit card if you want to be able to access a doctor in large parts of this country. No matter what they say and no matter what they do, they are not delivering on the words they promise. You think about the distrust that breeds within the community, where they see the so-called political leader of this nation waving their card around and saying, 'We're the answer and we're giving that pathway,' and then they go and live a very different reality of a co-payment. Let's be honest about health care. Let's be honest about how people are living and what happens with health care. You can ration health care by one of two ways: price or lists. And the answer of this current government is to do both of those things, which is a completely irrational conclusion. You have to wait longer for higher and more expensive health care, principally so that they can feed the interests of the select few they seek to represent through the trade union movement rather than what we should actually be doing in health care, which—call me radical!—is focusing on patient outcomes. That's my radical proposition. I think we should run a healthcare system focused on patient outcomes that actually empowers Australians to be able to get the health and support and community through primary care to minimise long-term dependency on tertiary care and, more importantly, to make sure that people can live their best, full lives as healthy, engaged participants in the community and the workforce so that they can be happy, not a system designed to keep people ill to feed the benefits of the unions and the people that they are paid to represent and to maintain the political control by the Australian Labor Party. So that's the situation we currently face in health care, but that doesn't mean that occasionally we get pieces of legislation that come along that at least can do some good to try and change that, because even the Labor Party know the gig is up and they're not going to be able to sustain the health system that they rhetorically promote through their words and their propaganda on television because Australians know the gig is up because they're living the opposite reality. So, when you empower registered nurses to be able to prescribe things off the PBS in certain circumstances and when they're authorised to do so, you help empower nurses, reduce costs and hopefully get better care pathways through to achieve what I believe the central objective of the health system should be, which is to improve patient outcomes. That is a worthwhile objective, and, frankly, I'm very open to many measures that seek to achieve this in many realms, particularly in the healthcare system, to make it more sustainable, to reduce costs and to improve best outcomes for Australians and best healthcare outcomes for Australians. Having served on the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ahpra from 2010 until about 2013, I've seen what happens within the sector. You see the enormous pride that nurses rightly take in their profession. But, as is often the case with disciplinary and registration boards, you also, tragically, see the consequences of when trust is abused. We see that in this place with certain committees as well, where trust is abused. But when there are improper and rigid guidelines around access to certain healthcare services and certain medicines there are a select few who, unfortunately, abuse that trust for their own gain and their own benefit. Getting the balance in law is right because it's such an important part of it. What we have here is legislation that addresses a pathway for registered nurses who are qualified, have capacity and have the regulatory framework to be able to do their jobs better, to allow better outcomes for patient care. On that basis, I'm very supportive of the principle of the legislation as passing it will improve patient outcomes, will improve healthcare services and will actually free up capital and time for nurses, doctors and specialists to be able to support patients where it's needed. That's going to continue to be a big challenge for our country into the future. We know what happens if we don't do that. We're going to have higher costs and unsustainability in the system that will come through via lower quality care in communities, particularly in lower socioeconomic communities and rural and regional areas. We know that it will make it harder to be able to build a robust and resilient health system that this nation needs. You only need to look at what is happening in the British and Canadian systems. Because of their rigidity with a system geared towards the interests of union members, not patients, the consequences that then flow from that mean people increasingly have to wait, they are denied care and, because they can't buy things on the basis of price, they are forced to ration on the basis of lists. The lists are getting longer and longer and longer and longer and longer. This feeds distrust and resentment within the Australian community, because those who need services are not able to access them, and we're not getting the health outcomes that Australians desperately need. In the context of putting forward a practical, modest measure, I implore the government that finally they might start to work towards a healthcare system that works for the Australian people based on honesty, based on patient outcomes and based on improving the health and wellbeing of this nation.