Kerryn Phelps's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Criminal Code Amendment (Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material) Bill 2019; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I second the amendment. I'd firstly like to convey my sincere condolences to the people of New Zealand for the tragedy in Christchurch, which has been the catalyst for the Criminal Code Amendment...
I second the amendment. I'd firstly like to convey my sincere condolences to the people of New Zealand for the tragedy in Christchurch, which has been the catalyst for the Criminal Code Amendment (Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material) Bill 2019. The live streaming of this atrocity is abhorrent to us all. However, the proposed amendments to criminal legislation to deal with the live streaming of violent material on social media could have serious unintended consequences, as we've heard here today, and, in the interest of responsible governance, should not be rushed through the parliament. The bill was announced as a reaction to the horrific Christchurch terrorist attacks, which were streamed live across social media. There is no question in my mind about the intent of this bill. The Law Council has said that, while steps should be taken to ensure social media is not weaponised to promote hatred and violence, proper consultation must occur to ensure fair and effective legislation. Social media companies must do more to avoid this form of violent content being uploaded and viewed, but making social media companies and their executives criminally liable for the live streaming of criminal content is a serious step which requires careful consideration. The legislation clearly defines relevant offensive content. The problem is regarding notification. The IT industry is deeply concerned about issues around notification. There are processes already in place to act on notifications, and algorithms are currently being developed to find offensive content so that IT companies can act to remove it. Anyone can upload anything online, and the IT companies don't have to be notified that it is there. Moreover, what does 'expeditious' mean? There is no clear definition of this time line imposed on an IT company, which may not have received a notification of the abhorrent content. Considering that the executors of social media platforms who do not remove the abhorrent material expeditiously can be punished by three years imprisonment or fines equating up to 10 per cent of a platform's annual turnover, the repercussions are great. What does 'expeditiously' mean? Is it five minutes? Is it 15 minutes? Is it an hour? Is it a day? The legislation does not define the meaning of expeditious. Despite its best intentions, laws formulated as a knee-jerk reaction to a tragic event do not necessarily equate to good legislation and can have myriad unintended consequences. One such unintended consequence is that global IT platforms will bypass Australia to avoid being exposed to this risk. A key concern with the bill as drafted is that whistleblowers may no longer be able to deploy social media to shine a light on atrocities committed around the world, because social media companies will be required to remove that content for fear of being charged with a crime. Social media can and has been used, including by media organisations and whistleblowers to draw attention to violent atrocities occurring overseas or criminal conduct by a foreign government, such as injuring or killing its own citizens. The legislation may have a chilling effect on the potential for social media users and media organisations who use social media providers to perform this important public service function. Whistleblowers may unfortunately be prevented from being able to tell these important stories through such providers. Similarly, this may influence the social media platforms and methods that media organisations are able to use to communicate important public interest pieces. If people on social media seek to shine a light on an atrocity or criminality, this is where the bill bites, as there is no defence for social media providers who choose not to remove violent content because the provider believes the material is in the public interest. So the bill could, in effect, lead to censorship of the media, which could undermine the very potential of the fourth estate to hold governments to account. The Law Council has called for this legislation to be referred to a parliamentary committee for review and consultation. The shadow Attorney-General also said this morning that this should happen, and this is, indeed, the intent of this amendment. We need to consider how to provide a public interest defence for those who may be captured by the proposed offences but honestly believe on reasonable grounds that they are acting in the public interest in not removing particular material from social media in order to expose criminal content that should be brought to the public attention. Consideration could be had to modelling such a public interest defence of similar defences that already exist in other legislation, such as Commonwealth whistleblowing legislation or the Public Interest Disclosures Act 1994 New South Wales, which provides protection to public officials who report public sector wrongdoing in particular circumstances. Any government or, indeed, any major party seeking to govern should be mindful of passing rushed legislation without consulting stakeholders, including the affected industry, or considering the broader implications. It is much better to get this legislation right than to pass flawed laws that will lead to unintended consequences. This bill should be referred to committee for consideration.
Christchurch: Attacks | Condolences | House debates
I rise today to express my deep condolences to those who were injured and to the families and friends of those who lost their lives as a result of the horrific, right-wing-extremist terror attack...
I rise today to express my deep condolences to those who were injured and to the families and friends of those who lost their lives as a result of the horrific, right-wing-extremist terror attack in Christchurch on 15 March during their peaceful Friday prayers. All Australians stand with New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and the people of New Zealand as they process their shock and grief. In the wake of this attack on Christchurch's mosques that left 50 people dead, Prime Minister Ardern has exemplified what a strong leader looks like in the face of tragedy, with compassion and empathy at her core. Rather than falling into the trap of recriminations and anger, Prime Minister Ardern focused on the victims and survivors, on the people of Christchurch and on supporting the Muslim community of New Zealand. Prime Minister Ardern said that the victims had chosen to make New Zealand their home. 'They are us,' she said, 'The person who has perpetuated this violence is not. They are us.' With these three words Prime Minister Ardern set the tone for the national and global conversation about this tragic terrorist incident. I wrote to Prime Minister Ardern to applaud her rejection of the extremist ideology behind the attacks, which she noted has no place in New Zealand society. And neither has it a place here in Australia. It takes great courage to lead with such awareness and reverence for diversity, kindness and compassion, noting that these are qualities for which New Zealanders are renowned. It was moving to see spontaneous expressions of support for the Muslim community in Christchurch—in particular, the group of young people performing the haka to commemorate a school friend who lost his life in the attacks. Prime Minister Ardern continues to lead with extraordinary empathy and influence on the global political stage in such a positive way. Yet the attacks in Christchurch illustrate just a small fragment of a global rise not only in anti-Muslim prejudice but prejudice against vulnerable groups, based on their religious, ethnic or political identity. Extremism in all its forms is repugnant and is anything but benign. The millions of Muslims who have died, who have been displaced or who have been put in detention or intimidated in other ways have not been treated this way only as part of a religious conflict. This is also about how some nation-states treat their minorities. Christians are oppressed in China, Pakistan and Indonesia, while France and Germany reported an alarming rise in anti-Semitism last year. This is in a climate of rising anti-Semitism in Australia, where there has been a 59 per cent increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the past year. There has also been a reported rise in anti-Muslim attitudes. To effectively challenge this threat requires an essential shift towards inclusion rather than division. Everyone has a right to their view but it is our job as parliamentarians to find common ground—to unite rather than to divide. This is the strength of our democracy. Certainly, divisive politics should have no place in Australia. I want to see an end to the polarising rhetoric that leverages unwarranted fear. It is our job to create a unified, safe and prosperous society that is capable of healthy, rigorous but respectful debate. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to incite hatred or violence or abuse. Fundamental human rights issues should not be about whether you are on the Left or the Right side of politics. It is about what is intrinsically and morally right. It is about the human experience. The strength of a nation lies in how well we treat all of our citizens and residents. With the decisions we make, we collectively nurture and define the character of our nation. Prime Minister Ardern has articulated the true character of New Zealand, emphasising its diverse and harmonious nature. Australians stand with the people of New Zealand as part of their process of healing. They are us.
Climate Change | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question was around whether the government would strengthen our environment laws and put in place a well-resourced, independent national environment protection agency with appropriate powers.
I rise on a point of order. The question was: will the government commit to—
My question is to the Prime Minister. The Wentworth by-election sent a clear message that people in my electorate want urgent action on climate change and the environment. We have just...
My question is to the Prime Minister. The Wentworth by-election sent a clear message that people in my electorate want urgent action on climate change and the environment. We have just experienced a summer of extreme weather events—there are one million dead fish in the Darling River—and credible experts say that, on our current trajectory, Australia has no chance of reaching its Paris commitments. Last night's federal budget failed to take the opportunity to promote the role of renewable energy and show national leadership on the environment. Prime Minister, will you commit to strengthen our environment laws and put in place a well-resourced, independent national environment protection agency that would have equivalent powers to the national corporate regulator and the ability to impose a similar range of penalties?
Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2018-2019, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2018-2019, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2018-2019; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
Climate change is one of the most pressing challenges of our time. If we don't get it right, our children will pay the price. We may already be paying the costs. Climate change and the...
Climate change is one of the most pressing challenges of our time. If we don't get it right, our children will pay the price. We may already be paying the costs. Climate change and the environment are top-of-mind issues for the people in my electorate of Wentworth and also of great concern to Australians everywhere. This will be a climate change and environment election, and the time to act is now. Just this morning I met with Cassy Faux and Lauren McGrow, who were victims of the recent Tasmanian bushfires. When you also consider that there were floods in Queensland, prolonged drought, storms and a million dead fish at Menindee on the Darling River, with a dramatic drop in temperature following a period of very hot weather, it seems fair to say that we are seeing a rise in the prevalence of extreme weather events. I have spoken a number of times in this House about the need for urgent climate change action. The cost of inaction will be significant. An integral part of the climate argument is the impact on our environment. Today I would like to speak about the growing problem of ocean plastics. In the past fortnight we heard about a whale in the Philippines that starved to death, having ingested 40 kilograms of plastics. Forty kilograms is an enormous amount. This was a wake-up call to all of us that we need to take action to limit the amount of plastic that is dumped into rivers and oceans worldwide. The global population is living, working and vacationing along the coast. Coastal populations stand in the front row of the greatest plastic waste tide we have ever faced. According to Boomerang Alliance, globally 275 million tonnes of plastic waste is generated each year and in 2016 over nine million tonnes of plastic entered the world's oceans. Ocean currents have formed five gigantic, slow-moving whirlpools, where the plastic collects, called gyres. Most of the plastic debris sinks or remains in the gyres, but a significant percentage remains in oceans, where it is a threat to sea life, or washes onto our coastlines daily. I volunteered with Clean Up Australia this year. You could not miss the presence of plastic on our shoreline. CSIRO recently completed a survey that found that three-quarters of the rubbish along Australia's coast is plastic. Most of it comes from Australian sources, not the high seas. Debris is concentrated near our cities. CSIRO also commented that Australia is probably a net exporter of debris to some neighbouring marine regions and surrounding countries. That is not the sort of export reputation that we should have. Australians consume over three million tonnes of plastic products and packaging each year but recycle less than 10 per cent of the plastics we use in Australia. Litter comprises 60 per cent of all marine plastic pollution, including around 420 million plastic bottles, another 200 million of other pieces of plastic packaging, 180 million plastic bags, 10 million plastic products and over 11 billion synthetic cigarette butts. After sunlight photodegrades the plastic into small pieces, aquatic life and seabirds mistake these fragments for food and ingest them. It's estimated that globally over one million seabirds and over 100,000 mammals die every year as a result of plastic. These creatures die through ingestion, mistaking it as food, or from entanglement in plastic items. It's difficult to know the exact figures, but a 2012 report from the Worldwide Society for the Protection of Animals indicated that between 57,000 and 135,000 whales are entangled in plastic marine debris. Over 200 species are directly affected by marine plastic pollution, with 96 per cent of all marine biodiversity being vulnerable to the ingestion of these microplastics. While all plastic debris is dangerous to the environment, the threats escalate as plastic fragments into increasingly small pieces and enters the marine food chain and, in turn, our diet. These tiny microplastic particles are often mistaken as food, and, as latest research suggests, they are being ingested at very high levels. The CSIRO, for example, has found that 90 per cent of seabirds around the world have ingested plastic, and even plankton—the basic element of the marine food chain—has been observed ingesting microplastic. The prevalence of microplastic being ingested by our sea life is a major concern which has rapidly become one of the major threats to marine biodiversity. Humans are not immune from these effects. It is estimated that people who consume average amounts of seafood are ingesting approximately 11,000 particles of plastics each year. The Great Barrier Reef outlook report 2014 identified marine debris and plastics as major threats to the health of the reef. It was found that 683,000 items of marine debris were recovered within the marine park between 2008 and 2014. It's well known that plastics entering the world's oceans are having a huge impact on our marine life. But they also have far-reaching impacts on human health and on our economy. A UNEP 2014 report identifies that plastics finding their way into the world's oceans cost approximately $17.3 billion per year in environmental damage to marine ecosystems, and the total natural capital cost of plastics used in the consumer goods industry estimates at more than $99 billion per year. When the life span of products and packaging is taken into account, the annualised overall natural capital cost to the consumer goods sector is $35 billion, with the largest contributors being food, nondurable household goods, soft drinks and retail. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, APEC, estimates that the cost to the tourism, fishing and shipping industries was $1.6 billion in our region alone. Local authorities have to bear the cost of cleaning up plastic litter from beaches, maintaining litter traps and bins and managing landfill. Managing waste is an enormous cost burden on local councils, who have diminishing options for recycling and eliminating plastic waste. The European Union is taking the initiative. Single-use plastic items such as straws, forks and knives, as well as cotton buds, will be banned in the European Union by 2021. In Germany, a new packaging law will come into effect on 1 January, which aims to improve recycling and reduce packaging waste. If we fail to clean up the plastic and don't stop the continued pollution of the oceans, we are facing the potential extinction of many sea life species and the interruption of the entire marine ecosystem, as well as a depletion of our precious food stocks. The establishment of a national environment protection agency would be a positive start. It is time to act now. I will be speaking about this subject at the upcoming Bondi Ocean Lovers Festival in April, and I encourage anyone who cares about our marine environment to attend. I urge the Australian government to take decisive action by developing policy and dedicating funding to combat this environmental threat.
Climate change is one of the most pressing environmental, social, economic and political challenges of our time. If we don't get it right our children and grandchildren will be paying the price...
Climate change is one of the most pressing environmental, social, economic and political challenges of our time. If we don't get it right our children and grandchildren will be paying the price and we will be counting the costs for generations to come. Climate change and the environment are top-of-mind issues for the people in my electorate of Wentworth. They're also of great concern to Australians everywhere. This will be a climate change and environment election, and the time to act is now. Just this morning, I met with Cassy Faux and Lauren McGrow, who were victims of the recent Tasmanian bushfires. When you consider there have been disastrous floods in Queensland, prolonged drought and storms, as well as a million dead fish in Menindee on the Darling River and a dramatic drop in temperature following a very long period of hot weather, it is clear we are seeing a rise in the prevalence of extreme weather events. I've spoken a number of times in this House about the need for urgent climate action. The cost of inaction will be significant. Another important part of the climate argument is the impact on our environment, and today I would like to speak about the growing problem of ocean plastics. In the past fortnight, we saw a whale in the Philippines that starved to death after it ingested 40 kilograms of plastics. Forty kilograms is an enormous amount, and this was a wake-up call to all of us that we need to take action to limit the amount of plastic that is dumped into oceans and rivers worldwide. The global population is living, working and vacationing along the coasts, and coastal populations are in the front row for the greatest, most unprecedented plastic-waste tide ever faced. According to Boomerang Alliance, 275 million tonnes of plastic waste is generated globally each year. In 2016, over nine million tonnes of plastic entered the world's oceans. Ocean currents have formed five gigantic slow-moving whirlpools called gyres, where the plastic collects. Most of the plastic debris sinks or remains in the gyres, but a significant percentage of it is suspended in ocean water where it endangers sea life or washes onto our coastlines daily. The CSIRO recently completed a survey which found that that three-quarters of the rubbish along Australia's coast is plastic. Most of it comes from Australian sources, not the high seas, with the debris concentrated near cities. I was a volunteer this year in Clean Up Australia, and you couldn't miss the plastic debris.
Closing the Gap | Ministerial Statements | House debates
During my presidency of the Australian Medical Association, I visited many remote Indigenous communities. I wanted to get firsthand information about what affected the health of these people in...
During my presidency of the Australian Medical Association, I visited many remote Indigenous communities. I wanted to get firsthand information about what affected the health of these people in these communities. I recall a number of stories that made a very strong impression on me. As we flew into one community in Western Australia, and we hit the red dust airstrip—the only way in or out of the community if there was a medical emergency—I was told that the airstrip was unsafe and unusable for many months of the year in the wet weather, when it became a river of mud. A child had recently died from a snake bite; they couldn't be airlifted out because the airstrip was unusable. The solution would have been sealing the airstrip, and the community have been asking for that for some years. In another community, there was a high rate of chronic renal disease. People needed regular dialysis but they couldn't live on country, so they were forced to either move to the city or die on country. They were forced to leave their families. The medical service eventually did receive a dialysis machine but there was no generator in the community to support it and to power it—it was still sitting in a storage shed behind the health centre. These are the sorts of systemic failures that contribute to the gap we hear about between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. In 2002 the AMA began to publish its annual Indigenous health report card, under my presidency. It was aimed at highlighting persistent inequalities in health outcomes and longevity. The AMA report cards since then have continued to highlight fundamental issues in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health, from addressing specific health conditions to looking at systemic failures contributing to these poor health outcomes. The medical profession has long and strongly advocated for increased awareness amongst governments, politicians, the media and the general public of the state of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health. The most recent AMA report card identified equitable needs based funding as a gap, and the need for systemically costing, funding and implementing physical and mental healthcare plans. In particular, it identified and recommended options to fill the gaps in primary health care, including addressing environmental health and housing issues and other social determinants. One example, from 2017, is that the AMA Indigenous health report card called on all governments to work towards ending chronic otitis media, or middle ear infections. Poor ear health disproportionately affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, particularly children, and causes a lifetime of hearing loss. It's a disease of poverty. It is directly linked to poorer social determinants of health, including unhygienic overcrowded conditions and inadequate and inappropriate health services. The medical profession has long demanded proper funding for proven, targeted programs, and for governments to fund and resource services that are delivered in a community-controlled way. However, we're still left with the unacceptable situation that preventable, chronic health conditions are not being well-managed. The promises by successive governments about closing the gap remain illusory. The statistics speak for themselves. A life expectancy gap of around 10 years remains between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and other Australians. Preventable admissions and deaths are three times higher for Indigenous people. There are matters contributing to these statistics, including: prevailing community attitudes; housing; education; an ignorance about culture and indifference about Indigenous culture; and a failure to invest in Indigenous language. We can't close the gap if we just put money into medical services. There are still many Indigenous Australians who don't have access to proper sanitation, running water or fresh nutritious food. Health will never improve under these circumstances. The fact is that successive Australian governments have failed to invest in what Indigenous communities actually need. Indigenous people are too rarely consulted about their needs, and many do not have access to basic standards of living, like proper housing. In a recent positive development, the Council of Australian Governments announced in December 2018 that it would establish a formal partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to work with governments on finalising a refresh of closing the gap. While there's been some opportunity for negotiations with Commonwealth, state and territory governments in the past, this is the first time that COAG has agreed to engage in a joint decision-making process. A coalition of almost 40 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peak bodies from across the nation is now providing legitimate community-controlled representation, and will be signatories to the formal partnership arrangements on a refreshed Closing the Gap framework. Cheryl Axleby, Co-Chair of National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Services, noted: We must be the architects of policies that affect our lives and the partnership must recognise our right to self-determine if the quality of life for our peoples is to be improved over the next decade. Ms Axleby continued: Solutions to end over-imprisonment must be developed holistically alongside other areas of disadvantage in the Closing the Gap strategy - health, education, employment - in order to create real change for future generations. In addition, family violence, child protection, disability and housing targets must be added. On this subject, it is essential to highlight domestic and family violence, which has a particularly damaging effect on Indigenous women, who are up to 35 times more likely to experience this form of violence than non-Indigenous Australian women. Indigenous women and girls are 31 times more likely to be hospitalised due to domestic and family violence related assaults compared to non-Indigenous women and girls. We must do better to address this horrific situation. This years Closing the Gap report found that progress on only two goals was actually on track: increasing the number of Indigenous children in early childhood education and halving the year 12 attainment gap. The goals to close the gap in life expectancy by 2013, halve the gap in child mortality rates by 2018, halve the employment gap, halve the gap in reading and numeracy by 2018, and closing the gap in school attendance by 2018 are not on track. The mortality rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children is still more than double the rate for non-Indigenous children. Homelessness rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are double the rate of non-Indigenous Australians. Ms Axleby noted: The Commonwealth Government has never had a deadline for ending the over-incarceration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people - this is why we need a national justice target to make progress to end this human rights injustice. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are 17 times more likely to be in prison than non-Indigenous Australians. In the last 10 years, the incarceration rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women has increased by 80 per cent, with 34 per cent of the women's prison population being made up of Indigenous women. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community's failure to be heard by governments has long been at the crux of the disappointing progress in closing the gap. Many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations participated in good faith in the consultations led by the Commonwealth in the first stage of the Closing the Gap Refresh conducted in 2018. However, the consultations were only superficial, and draft targets were developed later without any involvement of the Indigenous stakeholders. It is this lack of genuine partnership which we must change if we are to deliver much better results in the next phase of Closing the Gap. Mr John Paterson, a spokesman for the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation suggests: You are not going to get kids to go to school if they haven't had a decent night's sleep because of an overcrowded house, you are not going to get kids to go to school if they haven't got food in their tummy … you ain't going to get kids to go to school if parents are not encouraging them to go to school due to lack of support services for parents. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people want to have a say over their lives and matters that impact on them. We should invest in building the capacity of Indigenous Australians within their communities. That's why it's so disappointing that the government has decided to ignore the Uluru Statement from the Heart. It is only through continuing to address the systemic inequalities that exist in all areas of the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that we will be able to begin to have a real influence on health outcomes.
70th Anniversary of Australia's Formal Diplomatic Relationship with the State of Israel | Statements | House debates
This week marks the 70th anniversary of Australia's formal diplomatic relationship with the state of Israel, and I would like to acknowledge our profound friendship with the people of Israel....
This week marks the 70th anniversary of Australia's formal diplomatic relationship with the state of Israel, and I would like to acknowledge our profound friendship with the people of Israel. Israel was born out of necessity, with the background of 3,000 years of Jewish connection to the land and as a result of a vote of the United Nations General Assembly to provide shelter to a persecuted people who needed a homeland not only to protect themselves but to preserve their culture and traditions. In its short life span, Israel has evolved from a vulnerable, weak and resource-deficient country to a thriving democratic and innovative state. Israel, also known as the start-up nation, is advancing the world with technological inventions, ranging from drip irrigation and water creation technology to autonomous driving and breakthrough medical advancements. The ideas and inventions that stem from the existential need of the state in its early years to defend and sustain itself by its own forces has influenced the world and made Israel a technological incubator for the entire world. Israel has the highest amount of start-ups per capita in the world and is the leader in autonomous driving, cybersecurity, enterprise software, clean energy technology and digital health. With thousands of start-ups, hundreds of investors, dozens of accelerators and many other resources, the Israeli technology ecosystem continues to grow and produce extraordinary success. In Israel you say, 'I can deliver this,' and then you work out how to do it. The Israeli emphasis is on ideas, speed and rollout. This is a winning formula for Israel. Despite having a population of just 8.5 million people in the space of 70 years, the nation has developed more high-tech start-ups than all of Europe in recent years and trails only the US on that score. Silicon Wadi is an area around Tel Aviv on the country's coastal plain that has a cluster of high-tech industries built around military start-up and venture capital communities. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has commented that there are not a lot of benefits to being a small country, but the ability to create a successful ecosystem is definitely one of them. Israel and Australia share a strong and growing economic relationship. The Australian government opened a landing pad in Tel Aviv, encouraging and supporting innovation from Australian companies. Already 16 Israeli companies have joined the Australian Stock Exchange. Israel is now in the top six among foreign countries with companies on the Australian Stock Exchange. Strong results from these pioneers have even more Israeli companies considering listing as our economic relationship continues to grow and prosper. In 2015 Australians had invested $250 million in Israeli companies and today there are hundreds of Australians investing in Israeli companies and funds. Trade between Israel and Australia was officially valued at $1.2 billion in 2016. Many of the Israeli companies operating in Australia provide IT services, including cybersecurity, and many companies assist Australia in this area. The real value of this trade relationship has been estimated at $2 billion, as service exports are not included in the data. Despite geographical distance, Australia and Israel maintain a close economic relationship. We share concerns and interests with regard to cybersecurity, water security and agricultural technologies, to name a few. These are reflected in the economic agreements between Australia and Israel. These include agreements for cooperation with Victoria and New South Wales, as well as a federal R&D agreement. An air services agreement and a technological innovation cooperation agreement were signed during Prime Minister Netanyahu's state visit to Australia in February 2017. A working holiday agreement was finalised in June 2016 and will deepen ties between our nations for the business leaders of tomorrow. Like Australia, Israel has considerable areas of arid land, making reliable and adequate water supplies a significant concern. Israel has consistently been at the forefront of water management and conservation over the last 70 years. Israel is one-third the size of Tasmania and has many issues in common with Australia, including a large proportion of the land being desert, yet Israel recycles 86 per cent of its water while Australia recycles only seven per cent. Driven by necessity, Israel has learnt to squeeze more out of a drop of water than any country on earth, as it pioneers new techniques in desalination and water treatment, supported by radical national water policy. Just a few years ago, in the depths of its worst drought in at least 900 years, Israel was running out of water. Now it has more water than it needs. This remarkable turnaround started in 2007 and was accomplished largely by a new wave of desalination plants, supported by national campaigns to conserve and reuse Israel's limited water resources. Israel's desalination technology and water strategies have systematically turned one of the world's driest countries into the unlikeliest of water giants in only 11 years. Israel now sources 55 per cent of its domestic water from desalination at one-third of the cost of 20 years ago. The quest for water is a very real one. It is a contentious issue for Australia, just as it is in Israel. We have much to learn from Israel in managing and overcoming our own domestic water challenges. During a recent visit to Australia, Professor Noam Weisbrod, the Director of the Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research in Israel, shared vital advice: 'Water planning must be bold, it must be long term and decisions must be made on the basis that drought will become more frequent as the world gets hotter and drier. Climate change must be central to water policy.' He also noted that the Israeli system has a central authority that regulates and supports the water industry at a national level. Politics is largely removed, as this is the only way in which necessary long-term policy can be effectively and efficiently implemented. The drinkable water from desalination plants is also economically viable because the government has committed to buy it for 25 years. With that kind of guarantee, companies invest and the cost of water reduces. Israel is also an innovator in the field of medical technology, with benefits to health systems around the world. Israel runs a lifesaving cardiac unit for children. That is just one example. It's called Save a Child's Heart. It has treated almost 5,000 children suffering heart disease, with 50 per cent of those children coming from the Arab world. Dire circumstances and the marriage of human capital and resolute determination in the face of adversity have allowed Israel to achieve what many advanced economies could only dream of achieving. As the Israeli Ambassador to Australia, Mark Sofer, points out, the fact that modern-day Israel is at the forefront of the world in innovation, technology and economic development is nothing short of a minor miracle.
Petition: Climate Change, Energy | Grievance Debate | House debates
Climate change has been variously described as one of the most pressing moral, social, health and economic challenges of our time. The average temperature of the earth's surface has increased by...
Climate change has been variously described as one of the most pressing moral, social, health and economic challenges of our time. The average temperature of the earth's surface has increased by about 0.6 degrees in the last three decades, and global sea levels have risen by around three millimetres per year. Scientific consensus is that this is largely due to an increase in carbon dioxide and other human-emitted greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We have seen an increase in the number and intensity of natural disasters and the extinction of animal and plant species. Climate change has significant implications for human health; for example, with increased air pollution, insect-borne diseases and impacts on food supplies. Australia, like nearly 200 other nations, has committed at an international level to address this challenge as part of the Paris agreement's goal of emission reductions to keep the global temperature rise below two degrees Celsius. In October 2018, however, the IPCC report told us that these targets were not ambitious enough and that we needed to take urgent action to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, not two degrees Celsius. However, effectively addressing climate change is proving extremely challenging in the current Australian political context. Concerns about spiralling energy prices and reliability of supply have been used by the current government to sideline attempts to adopt climate policies that reduce Australia's carbon footprint. Yet climate change remains one of the top issues in the upcoming federal election, and I believe we need to work together to deliver change. To be politically and economically viable, any climate change policy in Australia must meet three key criteria: it must take account of social costs—or, as economists call them, negative externalities—associated with the emission of carbon; it must ensure that energy supply is reliable; and it must also ensure that energy is affordable, especially for low-income Australians. Along with a smart grid and energy efficiency, renewable energy is the lowest-cost sustainable solution for Australia's energy crisis. Renewable energy has the potential to be Australia's largest export industry of the future. In order to contain emissions, we need to shift away from coal. To do this, ideally, we also need to ban any new thermal coalmine developments. A landmark court decision by Chief Judge Preston in the New South Wales Land and Environment Court this month rejected a new coalmine, partly on the grounds of its future impact on climate change. Fossil fuels are a finite source of dirty energy, and the externalities are extreme and almost entirely uncosted. The majority of fossil fuel projects in Australia are owned by foreign multinationals, yet these fossil fuels belong to the Australian people. Fossil fuel projects benefit from massive taxpayer subsidies in the form of free water, free carbon emissions and massive royalty holidays, particularly for gas. Then there is the diesel fuel rebate, a $2 billion annual subsidy that no Australians, other than farmers, receive. There is no other private industry that is so dependent on using public, finite assets for private, foreign, largely tax-free gain. This brings us to the fundamental regulatory issue of whether there is a functional gas market. There is no gas market on the east coast of Australia; rather, it is a tightly controlled network, run by a small number of large multinationals for whom profit is the primary motivation. November 2018 saw Australia briefly surpass Qatar to be the world's largest exporter of natural gas. The alleged gas crisis in Australia is not about supply; it is more about offshore sales and supply being prioritised over Australia's consumer needs. In the last eight years, Australia's cost of gas has trebled to US$8 to US$9 a unit, while the United States's has gone down to US$3 a unit. We now have the highest gas prices in the world—even though Australia's east coast production has trebled this decade. If you treble supply and treble the price, you don't satisfy the fundamentals of a functioning market. The government has not intervened to establish a domestic reservation policy—the very policy which keeps Western Australian gas prices far more affordable than gas prices in the eastern states. Going forward, Australia must invest in renewables. Renewables no longer require major subsidies beyond policy clarity. The single biggest reason renewables are now the clear choice for Australia is that they are now the lowest cost source of new electricity generation. Solar and wind projects are now being built across Australia at just $40 to $50 per megawatt hour, down some 70 per cent in just the last three years. Firming these projects with pumped hydro storage for evening peaks takes the price to $70 per megawatt hour—almost half the price of new coal-fired power generation. Renewables are deflationary. Once built, there is no fuel cost—primarily, just interest on the debt capital. And, like storage costs, renewable energy costs are expected to fall some 10 per cent annually over the coming decade due to economies of scale and massive ongoing technology gains. Renewables are clean and sustainable. Renewables use almost no water. Once built, renewables create no air or particulate pollution or carbon emissions. Energy Australia, Origin Energy and AGL, Australia's three largest electricity generators, understand the need to move to renewables. Each has ruled out any involvement in any new coal power plant. Moreover, NAB, CBA, Westpac and ANZ have not invested in new coal projects since 2015. Macquarie Group is one of the largest investors in renewables globally. The idea of baseload electricity is last century's solution to today's problem. Yes, renewable energy is variable. But Australian cities have 24/7 water supply, even though it's not always raining. What we need is firming electricity supply to balance out when low-cost renewables are not available. Firming and peaking power will come from: pumped hydro storage; batteries, both utility scale and distributed; greater interstate grid connectivity; and demand-response management. In November last year, the New South Wales government launched an excellent program to pay 40,000 New South Wales households $1,000 over three years for the use of their home battery systems—a virtual 200-megawatt power plant delivering ultra-peak power supply. Investing in renewable energy infrastructure is creating substantial investment and jobs for regional Australia. The New South Wales government announced in November 2018 that it had $28 billion of low-carbon project proposals under evaluation right now, ranging from pumped hydro storage to wind and solar infrastructure. Investing in industries of the future will build our engineering and scientific capacity, leverage our financial capacity, including our $2.6 trillion superannuation pool of assets, and build export industries of the future. Mike Cannon-Brookes has recently launched the campaign Fair Dinkum Power, calling for Australia to target 200 per cent renewable energy. This is a vision worth discussing. After iron ore, Australia's top exports are all fossil fuel commodities—gas for electricity, coking coal for steel and thermal coal for electricity. We cannot simply switch off these industries, but we need to plan our transition to a clean energy future. We need to transform our economy and prepare transition plans for our most affected communities, such as those in the Hunter and Latrobe Valley. We need to build industries of the future. We should consider building a renewable energy hub in outback Australia and then exporting clean, 100 per cent sustainable and renewable energy, from either hydrogen or ammonia, via a subsea cable connected to Indonesia. Several of the largest energy investors and corporates in the world are exploring such a concept in the Pilbara—for example, the $20 billion nine gigawatt Asian Renewable Energy Hub. It gives me great pleasure to present on behalf of the citizens of Wentworth a petition to firstly impose an indefinite moratorium on all new coal mines, including Adani's; immediately cease all federal government subsidies for fossil fuel companies; impose a nationwide ban on fracking; and legislate a renewable energy target of 100 per cent renewable energy by 2030. The petition read as follows— The document was unavailable at the time of publishing. Petition received. Australia needs an evidence based climate policy led by our national government. We can and must all assume responsibility for supporting and embracing change for our children, for our land and for our planet. Taxpayers' money should be invested in creating the long-term sustainable transition to renewable technologies. ARENA and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation are world-leading examples of how our government can cost-effectively lead this transition. Investing government money in privately owned coal-fired power stations or protecting those assets against future changes in policy will only create bigger problems for Australia down— (Time expired)
Aged Care Amendment (Staffing Ratio Disclosure) Bill 2018; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
A royal commission into aged-care services must not put the brakes on making urgent reforms in the sector, including greater transparency around staffing ratios. My son Carl is in aged-care...
A royal commission into aged-care services must not put the brakes on making urgent reforms in the sector, including greater transparency around staffing ratios. My son Carl is in aged-care worker and doctors in our general practice provide GP services to aged-care facilities, so I have some insight into the difficulties faced by people trying to provide care for elderly residents, many of whom have significant age related disabilities, including various degrees of dementia, and are on multiple medications. We need to act quickly to address our community's very real concerns about understaffing and the low, sometimes nonexistent, number of registered nurses in our aged-care facilities as well as poor training and retention rates for aged-care workers. The Aged Care Amendment (Staffing Ratio Disclosure) Bill 2018 will force residential aged-care facilities to provide their staff-to-resident ratios every three months for publication. This will at least give people a more informed choice about which facility they choose for themselves or for their family members. At present there is no regulation around minimum acceptable levels of staff in residential aged-care facilities, just that providers must maintain an adequate number of appropriately skilled staff to ensure that the care needs of care recipients are met. In my electorate of Wentworth, all eight aged-care facilities visited by the New South Wales Nurses' and Midwives Association in 2018 failed to provide an acceptable level of nurse care per resident. This audit of just eight facilities revealed an average ratio of one registered nurse to 74 residents on night shift, which is not what families expect or residents deserve. These are vulnerable people needing around-the-clock care. This is just a snapshot of what is happening in aged-care facilities across the country. This data highlights how widespread the staffing issues are in aged care, even in the most affluent suburbs. The poorest ratio uncovered was just one registered nurse to 116 residents. Examples of missed care as a result of understaffing include missed medications, increased falls, limited time to complete hygiene care and the inability to mobilise residents as often as needed. Unless we have ratios, it will be a matter of profit over person. Last year, the six biggest for-profit aged-care providers received over the $2.17 billion in taxpayer subsidies, which accounted for around 70 per cent of their revenue. Currently there is no requirement for providers to report how government money is spent or a guarantee that it be tied to care. This is a sector whose providers profit over $1 billion a year and receive healthy government subsidies, large resident deposits and fortnightly part-pension payments yet it still has no guaranteed staffing or reporting requirements. Even when argued on pragmatic and detached economic grounds, reducing the information gap between the residents and their families and providers will lead to a more efficient, competitive market upon which competing residential aged-care services can more easily attract people through the greater quality of their service. The Australian Medical Association has continually called for a regulated, registered nurse-to-resident ratio which adapts to the individual care needs of residents and ensures that nurses are available 24 hours a day. According to the AMA, there's been a decline in the proportion of full-time equivalent registered nurses and enrolled nurses in the residential care workforce and an increase in the proportion of personal care attendants. This trend goes against the increasing chronic, complex medical care needs of residents. AMA president Dr Tony Bartone notes that there are not enough registered nurses with aged-care experience to provide the clinical governance, oversight and leadership required in these facilities, leading to poor clinical care, inadequate communication and a lack of knowledge about individual residents. Personal care attendants cannot duplicate the work of registered nurses. Even then, personal care needs must be considered as a quality of life issue for elderly people with high dependency needs. I'm told that personal care attendants may have only 20 minutes per day to attend to all the resident's personal care needs, including showering, toilet, hair and dental hygiene. With an ageing population and an aged-care reform moving to ensure older people can stay in their home for as long as appropriate, it's likely that the clinical attention required by those in residential facilities will become more intense. The government must, as a matter of urgency, ensure that the health and aged-care systems and their workforces are prepared for this. I wholeheartedly support the member for Mayo's legislation as an important first step in addressing community concerns about staffing ratios in our nursing homes.
Banking and Financial Services | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Treasurer. The mortgage-broking model originated as a disrupter to the market power of the major banks, which were gouging clients. With the government's proposed changes to...
My question is to the Treasurer. The mortgage-broking model originated as a disrupter to the market power of the major banks, which were gouging clients. With the government's proposed changes to the mortgage-broking industry resulting from the Hayne royal commission into banking, how can the government ensure that the oligopoly of the big banks does not benefit financially whilst average families and small business once again are forced to pay the price of limited competition?
Immigration Detention | Statements by Members | House debates
It was heartening over the weekend that the response in my electorate to the passage of last week's emergency medical transfers bill was overwhelmingly positive. The people of Wentworth are...
It was heartening over the weekend that the response in my electorate to the passage of last week's emergency medical transfers bill was overwhelmingly positive. The people of Wentworth are compassionate, engaged and principled. They can see through the deliberate misinformation campaign currently being waged by the Prime Minister, the Minister for Home Affairs and the Attorney-General. In this spirit, I note the following from a White House transcript of the phone call between former member for Wentworth and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and United States President Donald Trump on 28 January 2017. The topic of the discussion was the transfer deal struck between Mr Turnbull and the US President Barack Obama for the transfer of refugees from Australia's offshore processing centres to the United States. Mr Turnbull said: We know exactly who they are. They have been on Nauru or Manus for over three years and the only reason we cannot let them into Australia is because of our commitment to not allow people to come by boat. Otherwise we would have let them in. … … … It is not because they are bad people. Now we read in today's Daily Telegraph a claim that half of those refugees held in offshore processing centres on Manus Island and Nauru still do not have their identities confirmed and one in six checks so far have a red flag. Both of these things cannot be true. It really does appear that the current government cannot help itself when trying to score political points at the expense of refugees and people seeking asylum. I'm proud to continue the fine tradition of moderate, small-L liberalism in the seat of Wentworth. I told the people of Wentworth that I would work to help get kids off Nauru and for the humane treatment of people seeking asylum. (Time expired)
Refugee Protection Bill 2019; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I second the motion. Last week, the parliament passed the Migration Amendment (Urgent Medical Treatment) Bill 2018. The bill provides a medical solution to a medical problem, whereby sick asylum...
I second the motion. Last week, the parliament passed the Migration Amendment (Urgent Medical Treatment) Bill 2018. The bill provides a medical solution to a medical problem, whereby sick asylum seekers can be transferred to Australia for medical treatment when they cannot be successfully treated on Manus Island or Nauru. The bill provides a humanitarian approach to enable proper medical treatment to people in Australia's care. It applies only to the just over 1,000 people currently on Manus Island and Nauru. As PM Malcolm Turnbull told the United States President, Donald Trump, in 2017, 'We know exactly who they are; these people have been there since 2013.' Operation Sovereign Borders has worked to deter boats from leaving to make the dangerous journey to Australia, but the job is only half done. It's very clear that the global refugee system is in crisis. The effectiveness of the refugee convention is dependent on international solidarity, and credible and principled accountability for the protection of those seeking asylum. Around the world, countries are turning their backs on the refugee convention and neglecting their voluntarily assumed legal responsibilities. Under the current system, sole responsibility for providing protection and assistance to refugees lies with the government of whatever country they happen to be in. This creates incentives for asylum seekers to attempt longer and riskier journeys to reach wealthier destinations where they can maximise their social outcomes. It also incentivises those nations to put up barriers, preventing asylum seekers from accessing their territories. Countries like Australia continue to pay lip-service to their obligations, but are implementing measures aimed at deterring and blocking asylum seekers from accessing those protections. We need to remove such incentives and prevent deaths at sea. During my campaign for the seat of Wentworth I focused on two priority areas with regard to those seeking asylum. I wanted to get all kids off Nauru and to find a solution for those on Nauru and Manus who are in desperate need of proper medical care. This was achieved with the passage of the medevac bill in the House of Representatives last Tuesday. The other campaign promise was to build capacity in the region. This is why I'm supporting the member for Denison's bill. Australia needs to work more constructively with our neighbours to enhance refugee protection in the region. In the short term this will mean Australia working cooperatively with governments in our region to assist them in affording basic rights and protections for our refugees. By improving conditions we can take away the incentive or need for onward travel to Australia. In the longer term we can work towards some form of centralised regional processing system. It would require numerous states across our region to buy in and offer resettlement places and to afford protection to both asylum seekers awaiting processing and those found to be refugees. (Time expired) Debate adjourned.
Last Sunday the people of Wentworth woke up to the shocking discovery that public places in Bondi Beach and Bondi Junction had been vandalised with anti-Semitic graffiti, including more than 20...
Last Sunday the people of Wentworth woke up to the shocking discovery that public places in Bondi Beach and Bondi Junction had been vandalised with anti-Semitic graffiti, including more than 20 swastikas on the iconic Bondi Beach murals. The swastika became the most recognisable icon of Nazi propaganda, becoming a symbol of anti-Semitism and terror. Today in Germany and other European states the public display of Nazi symbolism, including on the internet, is prohibited by law, and individuals violating such terms are subject to criminal proceedings. There is no place for anti-Semitism or any form of racism in Australia. The New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies CEO Vic Alhadeff stated: The swastika represents the ultimate in race hatred, and the people of Bondi and indeed all Australians of goodwill will stand together in condemning this shocking display. Unfortunately, this local incident is reflective of the rise of anti-Semitism not only in Australia but globally as well. According to the Executive Council of Australian Jewry in their 2018 report, in the past 12 months there has been a 59 per cent increase in anti-Semitic incidents, such as harassment, vandalism and threats by email, telephone and social media. This increase is unprecedented in Australia. The French government has also reported that anti-Semitic acts increased by 69 per cent in the first nine months of 2018. Regardless of your religion or beliefs, it's important as a community and as a nation that we stand up against any form of racism. Vigilance is vital. The Wentworth community is united in its outrage and its condemnation of Sunday's events. As Joshua Kirsh from the Australasian Union of Jewish Students remarked, 'Anti-Semitic imagery at Bondi Beach, at the heart of Sydney's Jewish community, can never be tolerated.' The anti-Semitic symbols of the past if left unchecked can far too easily manifest as anti-Semitic violence in the present and the future. Soon after the graffiti was discovered on Sunday, Waverley Council promptly removed it and repaired the subsequent damage to the murals. While physically removed, the damage and shock continue to reverberate across the community. Racism in all its manifestations diminishes the moral character of our nation. It divides and cultivates fear in a way that opposes harmony, peace and tolerance. The Mayor of Waverley Council, John Wakefield, said, 'Racism has no place in our culturally diverse community and we condemn last night's incident in the strongest terms.' This episode is further evidence that parliament needs to unite on humanitarian issues, with the human experience being at the forefront of our policy-making decisions. Divisive politics should have no place in Australia. Everyone has the right to their view, but it is our job as parliamentarians to unite rather than to divide. This is the strength of our democracy. Australia is internationally recognised as a successful multicultural society. We are proudly diverse, built on the strong, determined shoulders of immigration. We as a nation we are facing the broader crisis of intolerance and the rise of hate politics, evidenced by the Bondi graffiti incident. This negativity is a global phenomenon known as a post-crisis realignment, a polarising divisive sentiment that focuses on fear, national security and the threat of terrorism. Politicians are servants to our nation. We are tasked to navigate a path that will create a unified, safe and prosperous society that is capable of healthy, rigorous debate. We must ensure differences are respected and tolerance is revered and rewarded. With the decisions we make we collectively nurture and define the character of the nation. As leaders, we must use the experiences of the past and the challenges of the present to define and determine together how we want to evolve, where we want to go and, ultimately, who we want to be. I believe deeply that Australians all deserve more than the divisive, negative hate politics that presently dominate the national political conversation. Human rights issues should not be about whether you are on the Left or the Right side of politics. It is about being intrinsically and morally responsible. It is about the human experience. Together we can say, 'No more!' to scaremongering and negative politics. We can say no to anti-Semitism. We can say no to racism. We should search for and embrace opportunities to find bipartisan support for humanitarian, economic and social issues. In light of the racism exhibited on Sunday in Bondi, I encourage the House to reflect and consider the standards that we set in our policymaking that ultimately defines the character of our great nation.
Home Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2018; Consideration of Senate Message | Bills | House debates
I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.
Save South Head Campaign | Constituency Statements | House debates
South Head in Sydney Harbour National Park is an oasis that attracts visitors from around the world to enjoy walking trails with stunning harbour views, abundant natural beauty and tranquil...
South Head in Sydney Harbour National Park is an oasis that attracts visitors from around the world to enjoy walking trails with stunning harbour views, abundant natural beauty and tranquil surroundings. The New South Wales government is considering a plan to give six historic buildings stretching across South Head to a single commercial operator for two function centres and accommodation, which will operate seven days a week. The lease will run for at least 40 years. This national park is enjoyed by thousands of Australian and international visitors each day. Many visitors are unaware that Camp Cove Beach marks the site of the first contact in Sydney Harbour between Captain Phillip and the Gadigal people. Handing this site to a commercial function operator with no commitment or plan to activate the important cultural history of this land or to improve public access and visitation to this national park is a lost opportunity. While North Head, on the opposite side of Sydney Harbour, and Centennial Park and Bondi Beach, in my Wentworth electorate, have been listed on the national heritage register, South Head has no such protection. Stretching from Camp Cove Beach to The Gap, the Gap Bluff development, under this plan, will cater for more than 400 guests daily, with functions running in two venues from 8.30 until midnight, seven days a week. Walking tracks will become parking lots, views will be blocked by vehicles, and public access to this precious parkland will be restricted. The recently announced Manly to Bondi walk, which will make Sydney Harbour one of the world's great walks, would run right through South Head and have to contend with functions. Extra traffic entering the venue and in the already gridlocked local streets will impede emergency vehicle access to The Gap and security operations at the HMAS Watson naval base. Despite the potential of these venues to bring 3,000 extra people into the national park each week, there is no plan from developers or government to increase public transport, policing, noise control or security for the naval base. During the recent by-election campaign, I committed to doing everything I can to work with the Save South Head campaign and Woollahra council, which has rejected this proposed development, to pressure the New South Wales government to protect this invaluable historic green space for the enjoyment of all. Part of that plan should include listing South Head on the national heritage and New South Wales state heritage registers and ensuring a comprehensive community consultation process about plans for the site that includes the Indigenous community, historians, local residents, walking groups and the Navy, which operates the HMAS Watson on this headland.
Live Animal Exports; Consideration of Senate Message | Resolutions of the Senate | House debates
We have been asked to debate on the urgency of a motion to phase out the live sheep trade. There are a number of principles involved here. First of all, we are in a minority government and it's...
We have been asked to debate on the urgency of a motion to phase out the live sheep trade. There are a number of principles involved here. First of all, we are in a minority government and it's important that the voice of the people is heard. Certainly, the message that came through loud and clear during the Wentworth by-election was that the people wanted their voice to be heard. The Senate has asked us to consider this motion. This message has come from the Senate, and we are being asked now whether we should respect that request from the Senate. I believe it's something that we should respect. The other thing that the people of Wentworth said during the by-election campaign was that they care deeply about animal welfare. Indeed, over 70 per cent of people in Wentworth said that they wanted to see a phasing-out of the live sheep trade. They want this cruel and inhumane trade phased out. We have heard today criticisms about the whistleblower who alerted us to the shocking imagery of the treatment of these animals on board these ships. We should be congratulating this whistleblower, not criticising this whistleblower, for exposing the conditions for these animals. The other question about immediacy is: how much longer can we tolerate these animals suffering in these appalling conditions? The industry itself has accepted that the trade is incompatible with animal welfare. It has itself imposed a three-month ban over the hottest months. This is an admission by the industry that the animals cannot be protected. But the reality is that the hot months are not just three months of the year. There are six hot months of the year in the part of the world which is the destination for these animals. The government should be working on a transition plan, not on a plan to continue to protect this industry. They should be conducting a transitional plan in order to protect the primary producers who depend on this trade so that the government is ahead of the game and so that the primary producers can be ahead of the game, because the reality is that this is an unsustainable industry. The reality is that this industry has had an opportunity to reform itself and it is, in my view, beyond redemption. And the reality is that Australians want this trade phased out. I support the motion to immediately debate this motion.
Wentworth Electorate: Education | Statements by Members | House debates
Wentworth is a diverse community. We have mansions, apartments and social housing, CEOs and homeless people, high-, middle- and low-income earners and pensioners. We also have 15 private schools...
Wentworth is a diverse community. We have mansions, apartments and social housing, CEOs and homeless people, high-, middle- and low-income earners and pensioners. We also have 15 private schools and only one public high school. This denies families a choice. A number of public high schools in the area were closed about 20 years ago because of short-term planning based on short-term trends. These sites have since been sold off to private interests. It has led to a crisis in public education in Wentworth. The only public high school, Rose Bay Secondary College, is already over-capacity and the feeder primary schools in Wentworth have record student numbers. There is zero capacity to cater for the increased demand that will result from the dozens of already approved residential developments due to be completed in coming years. This problem is due to get worse before it gets better and it needs to be addressed now. During the recent by-election campaign, I committed to doing everything I could to work with campaigners, councils and state and federal governments to secure a site and the necessary funding for a new public high school for the families of Wentworth. That is what I intend to do. I acknowledge the advocacy work of Licia Heath and CLOSEast on this. It is a very important issue. We need to work together to deliver for the future of Wentworth.