Celia Hammond's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Cottesloe Beach | Statements by Members | House debates
Cottesloe Beach is one of the most well-known beaches in Perth. It features on postcards, it plays host to the annual Sculpture by the Sea exhibition and the iconic Rottnest Channel Swim, and...
Cottesloe Beach is one of the most well-known beaches in Perth. It features on postcards, it plays host to the annual Sculpture by the Sea exhibition and the iconic Rottnest Channel Swim, and even the Beach Boys performed there in 2004. Cottesloe is a destination for locals, regional visitors and international tourists all year round and is a key contributor to the WA economy through tourism. It is one of the most accessible beaches in metropolitan Perth, being within 800 metres of the train station. However, its amenities, accessibility and foreshore features have not had a significant upgrade in the past few decades. This is why I am working with the local council, the Town of Cottesloe, and supporting their vision to address several infrastructure gaps and improve Cottesloe Beach. I must stress that the proposed upgrades don't just benefit the local residents of Cottesloe; there are huge benefits which flow to WA and Australia more broadly. Because of this, I do not believe that the costs of the plan and the vision should be borne solely by the residents of Cottesloe. That is why I am calling on my federal colleagues and our government to support this project and help to deliver a vibrant, enticing and accessible key destination for locals and visitors from across Perth, Australia and internationally.
National Water Safety Day, Curtin Electorate: Trigg Island Surf Life Saving Club | Constituency Statements | House debates
National Water Safety Day is on 1 December. This year the day will once again be focusing on championing water safety. The highest number of drowning deaths happen in the summer. Last year 34 per...
National Water Safety Day is on 1 December. This year the day will once again be focusing on championing water safety. The highest number of drowning deaths happen in the summer. Last year 34 per cent of total drowning deaths occurred in summer and, tragically, there was a 20 per cent increase in drowning deaths across Australia. Males are drastically overrepresented, accounting for 80 per cent of all drowning deaths. This is an issue which is of vital importance to my electorate because the entire western side of my electorate, over 16 kilometres of it, is the most beautiful coastline in the country, if not the world. The beautiful stretch of the Indian Ocean from Mosman Park to Trigg Point, which is a new addition with the changing of our electoral boundaries, is a destination for so many people, not only those in my electorate but those from all over the city and state and, when the Western Australian borders permit it, from around the country and the world as well. Our oceans and beaches are absolutely beautiful, but we know that there are dangers, even for the most experienced swimmers. I want to pay my respects and say thanks to the surf lifesaving clubs, and their volunteer members, within my electorate. There are seven brilliant, vibrant clubs: Cottesloe, North Cottesloe, Swanbourne Nedlands, City of Perth, Floreat, Scarboro and, now, Trigg Island. Our clubs have a long history of patrolling our beaches and supporting our community. In fact, the surf lifesaving movement in Western Australia started at Cottesloe Beach in 1909. These clubs do all that they can, voluntarily, to keep us safe at the beach but they do need us to do our part as well. This means we should take up the National Water Safety Day challenge and remind people to do the following: swim at patrolled beaches and between the red and yellow flags, wear a lifejacket if boating or fishing, avoid alcohol and drugs in and around water, and supervise children at all times. I also need to note that the Curtin electorate clubs have a history of strong leadership and a strong track record of producing outstanding surf sports athletes. This was recognised at the recent annual Surf Life Saving Australia National Awards of Excellence, where Trigg Island surf club was named Australia's top surf club for 2021. This national award recognises an outstanding achievement in club development that results in Surf Life Saving Australia clubs providing safer beach and aquatic environments for the community. Given that there are 315 affiliated surf lifesaving clubs in Australia, this is without question a huge accolade and one that is richly deserved.
COVID-19: Economy | Questions without Notice | House debates
ND () (): My question is to the Prime Minister. Australia has fared better through the pandemic than virtually all advanced economies, and, as our recovery progresses, we are faced with the...
ND () (): My question is to the Prime Minister. Australia has fared better through the pandemic than virtually all advanced economies, and, as our recovery progresses, we are faced with the opportunity to use this success to build a stronger economy and pursue new opportunities. Would the Prime Minister please inform the House how the Morrison government is doing exactly this so we can look ahead to our future with confidence?
Curtin Electorate: Remembrance Day | Statements by Members | House debates
As part of their education on the Great War, students from Freshwater Bay Primary School recently marked the unmarked graves of fallen soldiers at Karrakatta Cemetery. These soldiers have been...
As part of their education on the Great War, students from Freshwater Bay Primary School recently marked the unmarked graves of fallen soldiers at Karrakatta Cemetery. These soldiers have been acknowledged by the Australian government as having died from the effects of war and were originally honoured with a war grave and granite headstone. However, the headstones no longer stand. This amazing Remembrance Day project was a truly collaborative community effort, initiated by Ben Turner at Freshwater Primary School, coordinated by the Claremont and Nedlands branches of the RSL, with Ian Jones from the Showgrounds Community Men's Shed crafting each of the wooden crosses. The year 6 students researched the soldiers, whose official war graves had been destroyed, and decorated a wooden cross to be laid at their unmarked grave. Two days prior to Remembrance Day, 56 students visited Karrakatta and laid their crosses to mark the graves of 35 soldiers. I want to record my admiration and thanks to all of those involved, but I also want to note my absolute disgust at the removal of the headstones of our World War I vets at Karrakatta and the building of footpaths over some of their graves. I want to assure the local RSLs and the vets' families that I will continue to work with them to ensure that this abject injustice is remedied.
Intelligence and Security Joint Committee; Report | Committees | House debates
On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's report entitled Reviews of Administration and Expenditure: No. 18 (2018-2019) andNo. 19...
On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's report entitled Reviews of Administration and Expenditure: No. 18 (2018-2019) andNo. 19 (2019-2020)—Australian Intelligence Agencies. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). by leave—The presentation of this report fulfils one of the committee's key statutory oversight responsibilities found in subclause 29(1)(a) of the Intelligence Services Act 2001, namely to review the administration and expenditure, including the financial statements of the six intelligence agencies in Australia: the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, ASIO; the Office of National Intelligence, ONI; the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, ASIS; the Australian Signals Directorate, ASD; the Australian Geospatial-Intelligence Organisation, AGO; and the Defence Intelligence Organisation, DIO. This oversight role of the committee is carried out in circumstances where the transparency and public accountability of the intelligence agencies must be balanced with the need to protect national security. The committee is privy to detailed, largely classified information about the administration and expenditure of agencies. Much of the evidence received by the committee, both written and in hearings, must remain confidential due to its classified nature. The committee has only a limited role in these reviews in advising what level of resources is appropriate for each agency to protect Australians from risks to national security. Similarly, the committee has no role in determining what the national security priorities should be, nor how those priorities may be met within existing resources. The committee also has no role in reviewing particular operations conducted by agencies, sources of information available to agencies, aspects of the activities of agencies that do not effect Australian persons or individual complaints about the activities of the agencies. Rather, the committee has the responsibility to analyse the evidence put before it and report to the parliament and, through the parliament, to the Australian community on the administrative arrangements and expenditures of each agency, and any changes to these activities that may affect an agency's ability to continue to meet its objectives. Unlike previous admin and expenditure review reports, this report covers two reporting periods—2018-19 and 2019-20. These periods constitute reviews No. 18 and No. 19. The committee commenced review No. 18 in December 2019. Submissions were received from the relevant agencies and classified hearings were to be held in late February 2020. With the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic most parliamentary and committee proceedings were delayed, and in June 2020 the committee resolved that the review would be finalised and considered in conjunction with review No. 19. The committee commenced review No. 19 in September 2020. Submissions were sought and received from the six intelligence agencies, the Auditor-General of Australia and the IGIS. In addition to the normal administration and expenditure information provided by agencies, the committee requested the agencies provide extra commentary on a number of focus areas, including: the impact of COVID-19 on the agencies' admin and expenditure; recruitment and retention processes; the implications of a constantly evolving threat environment; and the health of the agencies' cybersecurity. The committee found that the six security organisations have managed their admin and expenditure appropriately in a period of significant operational pressure not only from the COVID-19 pandemic but also from the evolving technological operating environment, as well as the continued maturation and reform of the national intelligence community. The committee has made four recommendations for the government to consider as a result of these reviews. Two of these recommendations relate to the provision of support services to staff. One recommendation goes to mechanisms to address ongoing issues which these agencies face, with persistent and repeated requests for information from certain parties. The fourth recommendation goes to the government to consider resourcing the Office of National Intelligence to conduct an enterprise-wide review of lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic. On behalf of the committee, I thank all the agencies for the way in which they engaged with the committee. I also thank and acknowledge the secretariat, who provide incredible service and advice to the committee. As a relatively new member of this committee, I acknowledge the current chair, Senator Paterson, and the previous chair, the now Assistant Minister for Defence. I also acknowledge the current deputy chair, Senator McAllister, and the previous deputy chair, the member for Holt.
Corporations Amendment (Improving Outcomes for Litigation Funding Participants) Bill 2021; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I thank the member for mercifully ending his speech with brief comments. I normally enjoy listening to the member for Whitlam speak, and there were a couple of matters which I agreed with him on...
I thank the member for mercifully ending his speech with brief comments. I normally enjoy listening to the member for Whitlam speak, and there were a couple of matters which I agreed with him on in his speech—namely, that there is a role to play for class actions in the Australian judicial system and that there is a role for litigation funders. But that's where the agreement between the two of us would end. Mercifully, he finished his speech with eight minutes left on the clock. I am happy to speak to the Corporations Amendment (Improving Outcomes for Litigation Funding Participants) Bill 2021, because this bill is designed to ensure that ordinary Australians who seek justice through class actions receive a fair and reasonable proportion of the proceeds of successful class actions supported by a litigation funder. Contrary to some statements, including that made by the previous speaker, this government is not anti class actions, nor is it anti litigation funding. This government recognises that class actions have a vital role to play in our legal system. In some cases, they are the ideal vehicle through which a group of people impacted by the actions or decisions of others can seek recompense. The use of a class action in appropriate circumstances helps both plaintiffs and defendants, as well as the court system in its entirety. When working properly, class actions can facilitate access to justice, discourage wrongdoing and promote the efficient and effective use of court resources. It's worth noting that the federal class action regime has been in place for almost three decades. In the 25 years from 1992 to 2017, 500 class actions were filed in Australia, and there is no disputing that there are many people who, through those 500 class actions, received access to justice that they wouldn't otherwise have got. Likewise, the litigation-funding mechanism may, in some instances, be the only way that plaintiffs can take their matters to court. Litigation funding provides a way for representative plaintiffs and class members to meet the costs of litigation. These costs include their own legal costs and, in the event of an unsuccessful outcome, the defendant's legal costs. When litigation funders pay lawyer fees and indemnify representative plaintiffs for adverse costs, it significantly changes the viability of class actions under Australia's loser-pays approach to civil litigation. Litigation funders also potentially close the considerable gap in financial resources between the two sides of the class action, reducing the defendant's ability to defeat the case through superior economic power. Litigation funding has become more common in recent years. The Australian Law Reform Commission found that litigation funding in class actions has increased significantly since 2008. Between 2008 and 2012, 40 per cent of finalised Federal Court class actions were third-party funded. In 2017 and 2018, 77 per cent of finalised Federal Court class actions were third-party funded. What concerns this government—and there's no major conspiracy—and what underpins this bill is that there have been numerous documented occasions in the press and in court transcripts in which the current class action litigation funding system has not worked in the interests of justice, where it has not resulted in fair and equitable outcomes. In short, there have been numerous occasions on which the returns made by litigation funders have been disproportionate to the costs they have incurred and the risks they have undertaken in the relevant proceedings. This is not spin. This is not hyperbole. In 2019, the Australian Law Reform Commission found that, when litigation funders were involved in a class action, the median return to plaintiffs was just 51 per cent. Conversely, when a funder was not involved, the median return was 85 per cent. That is a 34 per cent difference. Last year, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services, of which I was a member at the time, undertook a review into class actions and litigation funding. While there were a variety of views and opinions expressed through the course of that inquiry, there was virtually unanimous agreement from all submitters and witnesses that the current regulatory arrangements for litigation funders are too light-touch and greater oversight of the industry is required. The only debate was about the nature and extent of that regulation. I would also state that at the time of undertaking this inquiry the exact number of litigation funders operating in Australia was unknown and impossible to pin down with any precision. The Association of Litigation Funders of Australia submitted that there was no research and no specific evidence with respect to that number. In 2018, the Australian Law Reform Commission indicated that approximately 25 litigation funders operated in Australia and 33 funders operated in either the UK or Australia or both jurisdictions. This number, 33, was the number that the association estimated were operating in Australia. However, it's very difficult to ascertain the number of foreign litigation funders operating in Australia. Data collected by the Parliamentary Library for the committee's review last year indicated that, as at 18 June 2020, 22 litigation funding companies were known to be operating in Australia—14 were foreign owned or based overseas, six were Australian owned or based in Australia and the information of two funders was unknown. Given the significant role that litigation funders play in the class action process, the fact that there was no clarity at all and no way of knowing exactly how many litigation funders were operating was something that I found extraordinary through the course of that proceeding. It highlighted to me and to the other committee members the lack of a sufficiently robust regulatory environment. As noted above, the inquiry of the committee concluded that the scale of litigation funding, the growth in the scale of litigation funding, the participation of international litigation funders in the Australian market and the frequency of disproportionate and sometimes windfall-level profits highlighted the need to make regulatory improvements to ensure that representative plaintiffs, class members and defendants are achieving reasonable, proportionate and fair outcomes. The committee presented its report on 21 December 2020, making 31 recommendations. This bill is actually putting in place changes responding to seven of the committee's recommendations. Perhaps the most controversial of the changes being put in place by this bill, and one to which the previous member referred, is that which responds to recommendation 20 of the committee's report. The committee made a recommendation to the government to consult on the best way to guarantee a statutory minimum return of the gross profits of a class action and whether a minimum gross return of 70 per cent to class members, as endorsed by some class action law firms and litigation funders through the course of our hearing, is the most appropriate floor. The government acted on this recommendation and, on 1 June this year, the Treasurer and the Attorney-General released a consultation paper seeking expert views on potential design elements of a guaranteed minimum rate of return to class members. Twenty three submissions were received. In response to these submissions, the government released the exposure draft legislation on 31 September, and 21 submissions were received. As a response to that consultation—not a week's consultation but two inquiries, the Law Reform Commission committee inquiry and two periods of consultation—the bill that the government is putting forward is legislating a requirement that a court approve or vary the proposed distribution of claim proceeds to ensure that members of a class action litigation funding scheme receive a fair and reasonable share. The bill is going to establish a rebuttable presumption that a distribution will not meet this statutory threshold if more than 30 per cent of the claim proceeds in total is to be paid or distributed to non-members of the scheme, such as to the funders or to the lawyers. So it is setting up a rebuttable presumption of a floor—70 per cent of the proceeds must go back to class-action members. This bill will also require the court to consider a number of factors, including the funder's commercial return compared to reasonable costs to the funder incurred for the proceedings. It has been argued by some that putting in a floor or putting in this 30 per cent figure will somehow dissuade litigation funders and/or impede class actions. To that argument, I stress that this is what is known as a rebuttable presumption, meaning that it can be challenged by a litigation funder and a court does have the opportunity to vary it if the circumstances justify it. It needs to be noted in this context—sometimes forgotten by those advocating otherwise—that it is the litigation funders who hold the position of power vis-a-vis class-action members, and it is right that they, with their superior resources, should have to justify the additional costs and returns that they seek. A class action funded by a third party litigation funder is a complex scheme which is beyond the experience, if not the understanding, of most group members. Many of the members are not legally or financially sophisticated, and they may be vulnerable depending on the subject of the class action. And let's remember that litigation funders do not do this out of the goodness of their heart; they do it for a return. And, of course—no complaints here—they want to maximise their returns. What this bill is saying is: 'Fine. You can do that. You can seek profit. You can seek to maximise your returns. But if you are going to take more than 30 per cent of any payout for your own costs and profit, then you will have to justify it.' There is nothing outrageous in that. Further, the argument that having this floor will dissuade litigation funders from perhaps endorsing or following up with supporting some claims also goes against the evidence we received throughout our committee hearings. We heard in those committee hearings that litigation funders already take a very robust risk profile to analysing whether they are going to support a particular class action. One funder admitted that 98 per cent of their cases are successful. To me, that indicates that they are pretty good judges of what they're going to fund, and what they're not going to fund, right at the outset. In support of the overriding goal of ensuring that members of a class action litigation funding scheme receive a fair and reasonable share, this bill further provides assistance to courts in navigating the complexities of legal costs and funder commissions by ensuring courts consider the reports of independent experts in the representations of people known as contradictors representing the interests of scheme members when appointed. This bill provides that the cost of these experts are borne by funders unless the court determines otherwise. There are other elements of this bill—and I'm sure my colleagues will get up and address a number of the other elements here—but the only other element that I want to pick up on is that this bill also seeks to implement a consistent approach to class actions across all jurisdictions, maximising protection for class members throughout Australia. This avoids the risk of forum-shopping, which is very real, by funders filing in courts which do not have the same level of protection for class members. By way of conclusion: there is a lot of spin and rhetoric. There will be spin and rhetoric from all sides of the argument here. We heard it through our committee hearings. We heard various parties throwing allegations that litigation funders rip people off, and then you get the other side saying that this side of the parliament was trying to shut down class action law firms and somehow harm rural and regional people, neither of which are true. The truth is that we need our legal system to deliver justice. Class actions and litigation funding have a role in there, but litigation funding needs to be regulated. It's not sufficiently regulated at the moment. It's fine for litigation funders to go out and seek to make profits—that's absolutely acceptable—but we've got to make sure that those profits, those returns that they are making, do not come to the harm of the plaintiffs, all those 430,000 people who are making a claim against the government for this or are making a claim for product liability against another company. We want to ensure that those people who are the members of the class who might suddenly find themselves signing a complex litigation funding agreement, all the details of which they might not necessarily understand, are given adequate protection. This bill is designed to do that. It's to back in our justice system. It's to ensure that people who are taking class actions are protected. On that basis, I am a friend of this bill. Even though the member for Whitlam said there'd be no members for it, I am a friend of this bill.
The Action Plan for Critical Technologies | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry and Minister for Science and Technology. Will the minister outline to the House how the Morrison government's investment in our critical...
My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry and Minister for Science and Technology. Will the minister outline to the House how the Morrison government's investment in our critical technologies plan is creating jobs and supporting our economic recovery as we come back from the COVID-19 recession?
Curtin Electorate: School Leavers | Statements by Members | House debates
This year, over 2½ thousand young people are graduating from schools in my electorate—Churchlands, Perth Mod, Shenton, Iona, JTC, Newman, Bold Park Community School, Christ Church,...
This year, over 2½ thousand young people are graduating from schools in my electorate—Churchlands, Perth Mod, Shenton, Iona, JTC, Newman, Bold Park Community School, Christ Church, Hale, International School of Western Australia, MLC, PLC, Scotch, St Hilda's and St Mary's. To the teaching and support staff at all these schools: thank you very much for what you've done for and given to our kids over the last 12-plus years. Your patience, passion, perseverance and professionalism is hugely appreciated by all. To all the young people: you got this. COVID-19 has undoubtedly magnified the usual stresses that go along with leaving school. No doubt you've already been asked a zillion times, 'What are you going to do when you leave school?'—a question which is fine if you have a clear idea as to what you want to do, but it can be incredibly stressful if you don't. Just be reassured: it's very common for people to not have a clear idea as to what they want to do when they leave school, and it's perfectly normal to take some time to decide. You got this. Do your best. But remember: year 12 exams do not define you and don't dictate the rest of your life. Breathe deeply. Sleep well. Exercise. Laugh every day. Talk to friends. Ask for help. I know every school would have had a different graduation song this year, and at the risk of embarrassing my school-leaver son I say to him: my graduation song for you is Katy Perry's 'Firework'. Listen to it often, and listen to it loudly.
Climate Change | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction. Would the minister update the House on how the Morrison government is investing in the technology we need to reduce...
My question is to the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction. Would the minister update the House on how the Morrison government is investing in the technology we need to reduce emissions both here and around the world? And is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?
Financial Literacy | Grievance Debate | House debates
Financial literacy is commonly understood to be a combination of the awareness, knowledge, skill, attitude and behaviour necessary to make sound financial decisions and ultimately achieve...
Financial literacy is commonly understood to be a combination of the awareness, knowledge, skill, attitude and behaviour necessary to make sound financial decisions and ultimately achieve individual financial wellbeing. In other words, it's our individual ability to understand how money works in the world as well as how we earn it, manage it and spend it. Those who are financially literate are more informed about what to do with their money and are better able to provide a sustainable financial future for themselves and their families. The key financial literacy elements therefore are knowledge, behaviour and attitude. There are a number of ways of measuring financial literacy. A common approach is to define a person as financially literate if they can correctly answer three questions that test knowledge related to three key financial literacy concepts. These include an understanding of interest rates, especially compound interest; an understanding of inflation; and an understanding of risk diversification. Australia has a relatively high level of financial literacy when ranked globally. In the 2014 Standard & Poor's global financial literacy survey of 140 economies, Australia ranked in the top 10 countries for financial literacy. Notwithstanding this strong global performance, there is widespread financial illiteracy within Australia, particularly amongst young people. There are also large and significant gender gaps, with women, on average, less financially literate than men. In 2016, the HILDA survey showed that one in two adult women struggled with the three basic financial literacy concepts. This compares with one in three adult men. The HILDA survey has been backed up by numerous other surveys and reports, including one from ASIC in 2017 which revealed that only 35 per cent of all Australians know the exact value of their superannuation and another in 2018 which showed that women were significantly more likely than men to report that dealing with money is stressful and overwhelming. From a macroeconomic perspective, financial literacy is central to the stability of the financial system. From an individual and societal perspective, it matters for overall wellbeing, as empirical research shows that financial literacy is an important determinant of, and correlates with, a range of outcomes, including wealth accumulation and planning for retirement; superannuation savings; and women's economic empowerment and domestic violence. I note at this point that the government has recognised this as a significant issue and has taken steps to address it through supporting the development of the National Financial Capability Strategy. In the 2020-21 budget, Treasury has given $7.1 million over four years to assist in the rollout of this strategy and improve literacy levels across the country, with the assistance of government and non-government and not-for-profit organisations. Over the course of the last two years, I've had the opportunity to meet a number of times with a group of women, a number of whom live in my electorate, who are actively involved with this financial literacy strategy, and they've got a particular focus on taking steps to improve the financial literacy of women. These women, including Trisha Lee and Elisa Fear, have formed a not-for-profit organisation called Financial Toolbox, with the aim of building the financial knowledge and skills of Western Australian women to give them independence and freedom of choice throughout their lives. With Professor Lyn Beazley as ambassador and with principal partner Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand, Financial Toolbox is powered by a team of passionate and dedicated volunteers. It's important to note that they are doing this in the context not only of the low levels of financial literacy but also the stark facts that the national full-time gender pay gap is 14.2 per cent but, in WA, it's much higher, at 21.9 per cent. On average, WA women have less than half the savings of men, and one-third of WA women currently retire with zero superannuation. Financial Toolbox provides financial education which is independent and unbiased, as they are not related to any financial organisation. Their education events and resources are prepared through the generous time provided by financial expert volunteers, including accountants, lawyers and financial advisers. Not content with providing general financial education for women, Financial Toolbox is also committed to addressing the invidious position that many women in family and domestic violence situations face when seeking to leave the violent relationship. The statistics in relation to family violence are overwhelming and don't need repetition in detail here. Suffice to say that one in four Australian women will experience some form of domestic abuse in their lifetime. In Australia, that translates to roughly 2.6 million women or more than 265,000 women in WA alone. Experiencing violence also has significant implications not only for the victims but also for their children, families, friends and co-workers. The founders of Financial Toolbox recognise that, given that 80 to 90 per cent of women who seek support for domestic or family violence are also subjected to financial abuse, thousands of women are lacking the financial independence and confidence to leave abusive relationships. So Financial Toolbox created Your Toolkit as their response to family and domestic violence. Your Toolkit is an important and all-encompassing web based resource, providing free, accessible and practical information on personal safety, support and referral services and on money matters. The unique point of difference with Your Toolkit is that it provides in the one place all the information women need at various stages of their journey facing domestic violence. In developing Your Toolkit over more than two years, they heard from industry professionals and from women who had experienced family and domestic violence. They heard that the information they presented had to be somewhere that was easy to find and it had to be simple to understand. They were told on numerous occasions that users are not always browsing with a clear mindset; they can be in states of emergency, fear, panic and high stress when accessing the service. Now that it's set up, Your Toolkit divides the process of promoting in women the confidence to leave abusive relationships and the confidence to achieve financial freedom into four accessible steps. The first step is called 'Prepare'. It sets out information for women on how they can protect themselves and safeguard their security and the security of their children as they prepare to leave an abusive partner. The second stage is 'Act now'. In this part, the website presents information on how survivors can keep themselves and their children safe when leaving an abusive relationship. The third stage is 'Rebuild'. This provides advice to survivors who have recently left an abusive relationship as to how they can protect themselves and their finances. It includes information about accessing legal advice and government support. The fourth stage is one that they call 'Thrive'. This provides information on how a survivor can establish financial foundations, build their financial security, and set goals and saving strategies. Financial Toolbox have undertaken their first social impact report. This has shown that, since the toolkit's launch in March 2019, they have had over 52,000 users and 61,000 sessions. It is predominantly being utilised by women and is widespread in terms of age across all age groups. The majority using it—56 per cent—are based in Western Australia, but that still leaves a significant proportion of people who are accessing this site outside of Western Australia. Of those who've answered the specific questions, 55 per cent have experienced or are at risk of experiencing domestic abuse. The qualitative results of the social impact report show overwhelming support from industry participants. There are also testimonials from women with lived experience, including this: 'Thank you for doing this work. This work is incredibly important. There are so many women I know who would love to say thank you but can't. They're voiceless. So I speak for all of us when I say thank you. It's incredible and it's amazing.' With the immense demand for Your Toolkit, Financial Toolbox are looking to make this service truly national, hoping to build a database of resources and organisations relevant to survivors across the whole breadth of Australia. Given the quality of the work that they have done on this matter, I am going to be strongly supporting all of their attempts for funding to continue and expand this program, because it is and can be a life-saver.
Rearrangement | Business | House debates
I move: That order of the day No. 2, committee and delegation business, be postponed until a later hour this day. Question agreed to.
Dementia | Private Members' Business | House debates
I second the motion. I thank the member for Perth for moving this motion and for the words that he just said. To quote him: dementia is truly awful. As he said, it eats away at a person. It eats...
I second the motion. I thank the member for Perth for moving this motion and for the words that he just said. To quote him: dementia is truly awful. As he said, it eats away at a person. It eats away at them mentally and physically and it eats away at their personality. Dementia is not one specific disease. Rather it's a term which describes a collection of symptoms of a larger group of illnesses. These illnesses cause a progressive decline in a person's functioning, including a loss of memory, confusion, personality change and withdrawal. One of the most common types of dementia is Alzheimer's disease. Unfortunately, there is currently no prevention or cure for most forms of dementia. While we must absolutely prioritise research efforts into dementia, in the absence of a major breakthrough at this point in time, we must ensure that we provide a supportive and loving environment for those who suffer from dementia and for those who care for people who suffer from dementia. The importance of this can't be overstated. The facts about the incidence and impact of dementia are stark. Dementia is the leading cause of death in women in Australia and the second leading cause of death of all Australians. It is expected to overtake heart disease to become the leading cause of death in coming years. In WA over 42,000 Western Australians live with dementia, and over 240 new diagnoses are made each day. Nationally dementia impacts 472,000 Australians, and there are almost 1.6 million people involved in their care. The 2021 Intergenerational report highlighted that the prevalence of dementia is expected to continue to rise as a result of Australia's ageing population over the next 40 years and that without a medical breakthrough the number of people living with dementia is expected to increase to over one million by 2058. With approximately 70 per cent of people with dementia living in the community, the need to prepare our communities for an ever-increasing older population , both socially and physically , has never been greater . C ommunities that embrace our demographic shift stand to gain not only from greater social cohesion but also economically, through earlier diagnoses and people living more actively within their communities. There is no one-size-fits all model for creating a dementia-friendly community. It's something that needs to be developed locally, to meet local needs, and in a local context. And everyone has a role to play in creating dementia-friendly communities, a place where those living with dementia are supported to experience a life of meaning, purpose and value and where the accessibility of the physical environment supports people living with dementia to remain engaged, included and connected. There are many stories and examples of innovative practice in dementia prevention and dementia care. To highlight one example, something that happens in WA is the Forget-Me-Not cafes, a great initiative where people can come together to support those with dementia and their carers. The cafes provide a safe place for people to visit, socialise and interact with others. During a conversation I had with the chair of Alzheimer's WA, Professor Warren Harding, I provided my support for a memory cafe at Floreat Forum, in my electorate of Curtin. Also, after collaborating with Alzheimer's WA and with the town of Cambridge, we launched the Cambridge memory cafe earlier this year, and it's been a great success. It provides an opportunity for people living with dementia to maintain their community connections and helps to address some of the challenges they face, such as lack of access to safe social activities. Further, the memory cafe in Floreat Forum has raised awareness and understanding among local business operators and visitors to the forum about how we can all better connect with people who are living with dementia in our local community. By way of finishing, and to reiterate what the member for Perth has said, I will say that Western Australians are so fortunate to be served by Alzheimer's WA. Alzheimer's WA is the leading voice for people living with dementia in WA. For nearly 40 years it has provided a range of support, education and consultancy services to assist people who are living with dementia, as well as their families and carers. With the member for Perth, I went to the opening of their new premises in my electorate—they moved from his electorate to mine; it's not a judgement on him, but they have moved into my electorate!—and we were both there to welcome them and to celebrate their new premises. I want to express my congratulations to all involved in this amazing organisation. Thank you very much.
Curtin Electorate: VitalTrace | Statements by Members | House debates
I offer a hand of friendship to my colleague the member for Perth—he always does give me a smile to my face! I want to speak about something really important today. It's the fact that all...
I offer a hand of friendship to my colleague the member for Perth—he always does give me a smile to my face! I want to speak about something really important today. It's the fact that all women and babies deserve to have the highest standard of care and best treatment during childbirth. VitalTrace is a medical device start-up company in Curtin that is developing an innovative solution to the global problem of safely monitoring babies during childbirth. It was a pleasure to recently visit the headquarters of VitalTrace, a recent recipient of a federal government Cooperative Research Centres project round, to meet the team and learn more about the company. Current techniques for monitoring babies for poor oxygen, also known as hypoxia, during childbirth are based on outdated technology from the 1960s, which sometimes results in inadequate or inaccurate data. This can lead to serious complications, such as brain or other organ damage, and unnecessary intervention with emergency caesarean sections, all of which can have lifelong consequences for the mother and the child. VitalTrace has brought together a multidisciplinary team of specialist engineers and product developers, clinicians and researchers to develop a medical device that continuously measures a highly accurate marker of fetal hypoxia. This is a potential game changer for women's and children's health, and I'm looking forward to visiting them again to see their further developments.
Cybersecurity | Private Members' Business | House debates
I thank the member for this motion. Cyberattacks are a deliberate act of manipulating or destroying computers, networks or information, and I strongly support the government's significant...
I thank the member for this motion. Cyberattacks are a deliberate act of manipulating or destroying computers, networks or information, and I strongly support the government's significant investment in its prevention. Cyber is a new battlefield which we must be prepared to protect, as it poses threats to individuals and businesses alike. The Australian Cyber Security Centre received over 60,000 cybercrime reports last financial year, and it is reported that 7.5 million Australians experienced cybercrime. This has resulted in over $3 billion lost by Australians as a result of cybercrime and over $61 billion lost in trying to resolve issues created by cybercrime. The problem of cyberattacks has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, as people are spending more time online than ever. While continuing to increase their usage, using the internet and various other online devices connecting to the internet, 48 per cent of Australian consumers feel more vulnerable to cyberattacks now than prior to the pandemic. Despite feeling vulnerable, our usage continues to increase. Although many Australians are taking steps to protect their cyberactivities, including 70 per cent of Australians taking more precautions online, individual actions alone do not quell the rising threat of coercive activity that could undermine Australia's digital sovereignty. Overcoming this risk is a team effort that has government, organisations, business and individuals working together for the common goal of protecting Australia's cyberspace. I'd like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the important work of the Australian Cyber Security Centre. They are a critical part of the team, providing information to businesses and individuals on how to protect themselves online and providing technical support to those affected by cybercrime. This government is committed to developing the next national plan to combat cybercrime, a plan that will build on the Cyber Security Strategy 2020. We have a duty to Australians to ensure that we are doing everything we can to prevent and manage cyberattacks, and we are meeting this obligation by investing $15 billion in cybereducation, offensive capabilities and task forces to tackle cybercrime. I want to spend a moment speaking on the biggest threat to Australia's online security, and that is ransomware—a malicious type of software that cybercriminals use to deny individuals and organisations access to their information and demand payment to have this access returned. Perhaps the most concerning attacks using ransomware in recent times have been those targeted at our banks. Banks have been disproportionately affected by cyberattacks, with banks in the US experiencing a staggering 1,300 per cent year-on-year increase in ransomware attacks this year. This is also occurring here on our own soil, with the Reserve Bank of Australia reporting that a significant cyberattack is inevitable, given year-on-year growth. The Australian government is acting appropriately and pre-emptively to mitigate this threat to financial institutions, and we are protecting the privacy and information of all Australians. Strong, defensive cybersecurity is the best chance we have against ransomware, which is why the ACSC have a variety of resources available regarding ransomware and protecting against attacks, alongside a free alert service for all Australians and Australian businesses. I would encourage all Australians to visit cyber.gov.au and to have a read of the Ransomware Attacks Emergency Response Guide and the Ransomware Attacks Prevention and Protection Guide. There are also personal security guides with advice on how to protect yourself from common cyberthreats. To keep these practical and simple, there are five simple things you can do to protect yourself online. Update your apps and computer systems. You can do this by simply turning on automatic updates. Use multifactor authentication. Use pass phrases, not passwords, making sure they are complex. Back up your data in a place separate from your network. Beware of emails and messages from unknown organisations or people. In fact, a message just came through on our parliamentary network this morning reminding us not to open up unknown addresses. I reiterate that dealing with cybercrime is a team effort, and we all need to pull our weight to secure Australia's digital environment. Again, I thank the government and the ACSC for the hard work that they do, and the Australian businesses and individuals who are taking the time to educate themselves.
Australian Security Intelligence Organisation | Private Members' Business | House debates
I, too, recognise the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, ASIO, for the critical role it plays in protecting Australia and all Australians from threats to their security. ASIO works...
I, too, recognise the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, ASIO, for the critical role it plays in protecting Australia and all Australians from threats to their security. ASIO works tirelessly to protect Australians from politically motivated and communal violence through collecting intelligence, analysing and investigating terrorism threats, and providing advice to and working with partners to strengthen public safety and intervene to disrupt terrorist attacks. The need for ASIO, and the government's support for ASIO, has never been stronger given Australia's terrorism threat level has remained at 'probable' since it was declared that in 2014. ASIO's director-general, Mike Burgess, stated to Senate estimates in May this year: Australia's threat environment is complex, challenging and changing. In terms of threat to life, terrorism threat level remains at probable and unfortunately will do so for the foreseeable future. Right now ASIO is aware of multiple religiously motivated violent extremists who want to kill Australians. He also noted: At the same time our investigations in ideologically motivated violent extremism such as racists and nationalists are approaching 50 per cent of our priority counterterrorism onshore caseload. The director-general's words should serve as a disturbing yet important reminder that Australia's national security should never be met with complacency and that action must be taken to support ASIO and our other national security agencies in their everyday efforts to protect Australia against people and organisations that seek to bring violence, chaos and disruption upon us. That is why the Morrison government is committed to supporting ASIO in its efforts to protect the country and the Australian people. As announced in the budget, the government is giving ASIO unprecedented capability uplift by investing $1.3 billion over the next 10 years. This substantial commitment will allow ASIO to sustain its operations, enhance its capabilities to operate in a more complex threat environment, and respond to challenges posed by rapid technological change. Part of that money, which I particularly want to focus on, is the commitment of $945 million for current operations, building capability and the Enterprise Transformation Program. This funding will significantly enhance ASIO's ability to identify and respond to threats posed by more and more sophisticated threat actors, whether motivated by violent extremism or attempts at espionage and foreign interference. There's a long list of measures that this funding will support, but, just to name a few, the funding will enable ASIO to keep up with the latest technology that Australia's adversaries are using to undermine our national security. It will allow ASIO to defeat encryption based methods of communication, which are currently being exploited by terrorists and spies in an effort to conceal their plans to commit attacks on Australian soil. The investment will also allow ASIO to extract critical intelligence from large and complex data sets to connect the dots between that information, and more reliably identify potential threat indicators. It will accelerate ASIO's operational responses. And it will enable ASIO to promptly deliver detailed advice to government, industry and other stakeholders to ensure security threats are taken care of as soon as they are identified. At the core of the Morrison government there has always been a robust, unmatched commitment to ensuring the protection of all Australians. Through this unprecedented investment in ASIO over the next decade, the government is ensuring that ASIO will continue to evolve so that it can to out-imagine and outmanoeuvre sophisticated foreign adversaries, detect and disrupt violent extremists, and ultimately protect the Australian people. I also note that the government continues to ensure that the exercise of these powers by our security agencies is subject to strong and uncompromising oversight, including through the Inspector-General, the INSLM and the PJCIS. Finally, I would like to take this time to thank the many dedicated men and women who work in ASIO for the important work they do each day to protect their country and fellow Australians. Working for ASIO, much like our other national security agencies, takes a huge amount of sacrifice and commitment. Without their continued dedication, the many freedoms we enjoy on a daily basis and the incredible way of life we have in this country simply wouldn't exist.
National Security | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is creating a stronger and safer Australia and protecting our way of life...
My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is creating a stronger and safer Australia and protecting our way of life by enhancing national security, and is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?
Youth Voice In Parliament Week | Statements by Members | House debates
Last week was Raise Our Voice Australia, and I had a number of excellent submissions. There is still one that I wanted to read and didn't get the opportunity. It reads: My name is Dipika...
Last week was Raise Our Voice Australia, and I had a number of excellent submissions. There is still one that I wanted to read and didn't get the opportunity. It reads: My name is Dipika Choudhury. I'm 16 years old and go to Perth Modern School which is in the electorate of Curtin. Every morning, 4 out of 10 Australians wake up and look in the mirror feeling unsatisfied with their looks. Particularly today with social media being paramount, many young people, myself included, often feel pressured to look a certain way and fit into increasingly unrealistic beauty standards that are portrayed by the media. In a time where the isolation felt by many due to COVID-19 restrictions is already damaging people's mental wellbeing, we cannot afford to lose young people to their internal conflicts regarding their appearances. In 20 years, I aspire for Australia to be a frontrunner in the international quest to help those struggling with insecurities. Whilst it may seem like an impossible task, I believe if we ourselves seek small change, it is achievable. A kind caring voice can be all it takes to slice through a person's mental torment. So, I would like to encourage everyone to compliment those around them, because as Mother Theresa once said, 'kind words can be short and easy to speak, but their echoes are truly endless'. In 20 years I hope the endless echoes of compassionate Australians will create a society where we can live free of anxiety.
COVID-19: Western Australia | Adjournment | House debates
Johan, who is in his late sixties, has lived in the electorate of Curtin for years and, like so many others, Johan has family living overseas. During COVID, his sister's husband was diagnosed...
Johan, who is in his late sixties, has lived in the electorate of Curtin for years and, like so many others, Johan has family living overseas. During COVID, his sister's husband was diagnosed with and ultimately passed away from stage 4 cancer. They lived in South Africa. Unfortunately, due to travel restrictions, Johan was unable to travel to South Africa to attend his brother-in-law's funeral or to be by the side of his sister to give her support in her time of grief. Her grief was overwhelming and, tragically, Johan's glamorous, talented and devoted sister ended her own life soon after her husband's death. In speaking with me, Johan was quite matter of fact in saying that his sister was sacrificed for the greater good. However, in his own words, he also told me: 'I believe that the COVID situation has changed and, while the government has done a very good job in the past, and that intervention was sound philosophically and ethically, the change in situation puts a question as to the continuation of the ethical rightness. I call for a return of personal liberties that is no longer morally, philosophically and ethically acceptable to take away people's personal freedoms.' Jo, in her fifties, has also lived in the electorate for decades. In her words: 'I've been cut off from my only child for too long. He has battled through life in New York without family, without hugs and without the support of Australia he should have got as a citizen. He is one of those who has been forgotten and vilified in the press here. The hate directed at Australians living overseas has been hard to take. The effect on my mental health and physical health has been substantially worse than I would have imagined, but the government doesn't care. Our family is just collateral damage and we are not listed in any numbers anywhere. We want our family reunited. We have done all the right things throughout—vaccinated as soon as possible and quarantined as required. We don't get any money from the government and my son gets nothing. We just want to be together.' Ted, in his sixties, wrote me this, in part: 'A ship in the harbour is safe, but that's not what ships are for. Being denied the freedom to travel, even in your own country, when double vaccinated is not what life is for. The values of this government seem to be that a normal life is being able to have a beer at the pub or go to the footy, rather than being able to be with your family even in our own country at the end of life or other significant events. My father passed away last week and my brother, who is double vaccinated, could not be at his end of life. This is now affecting thousands of families. For many of us, the window to travel is a joy and this joy for many seniors is closing down. Seniors are being robbed of time. This virus is not going away. We need to learn to live with it and the price we pay for kicking that can down the road is enormous and it's particularly enormous for seniors.' Pamela, born in Cottesloe, told me this: 'COVID-19 is not the only killer out there. Separation from family and friends during any of life's emotional crises and celebrations, things we once said we valued, delivers long-term psychological damage and immense distress. My very elderly mother lives in Perth. I live and have businesses in London. I stayed in Perth for 18 months to care for her during the pandemic at a cost to my business and personal life. I returned to England in late August to pick up the pieces against the then promised international border openings in time for Christmas family reunions. Now my mother has had a stroke and I'm desperate to be back but the premier has extended the state's hibernation from the world and soon probably the rest of Australia again. My 95-year-old mother cannot keep waiting for new conditions to arise and promised reunions to be broken'. These are real Western Australians and real stories. These are our friends, neighbours and colleagues. Yes, we have been living a free life in Western Australia in many respects and it's been wonderful, but it has not been without cost. These stories are just the tip of the iceberg of those in WA who have been impacted by the border closures. We need our vaccination rates to increase. We need to ask for and be given a clear time frame as to when our borders will open. We need to ask for and be given a clear plan out. We need clarity, because there are so many of us who need hope.
Diabetes | Constituency Statements | House debates
Type 1 diabetes can happen to anyone. Triggered by a combination of genetic and environmental factors, it cannot be prevented and it does not have a cure. Diagnosis has a profound impact on the...
Type 1 diabetes can happen to anyone. Triggered by a combination of genetic and environmental factors, it cannot be prevented and it does not have a cure. Diagnosis has a profound impact on the person and their loved ones. Unlike many other medical conditions, people with type 1 diabetes manage their medication themselves, injecting or pumping insulin into their bodies every day to regulate their blood glucose levels in order to stay alive. I recently met, in my electorate, with Dr Debbie Smith and Ms Kari Musick of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. The foundation aims to raise awareness of the challenges faced by people with type 1 diabetes. Debbie and Kari were open, candid and generous in sharing their extensive knowledge and experience with me. They expressed their appreciation of all that the federal government has done—and I note this has been done with bipartisan support—to support those who have type 1 diabetes. This includes free access to the Continuous Glucose Monitoring Initiative for children under 21, concession status individuals and pregnant women. However, they also highlighted to me that access to life-saving and life-changing technologies that measure blood glucose and deliver insulin in response to need is inconsistent and incomplete in Australia and becomes more difficult for many juveniles after they reach adulthood. The reality is that there's a significant financial burden for people living with type 1 diabetes, their carers and the broader Australian economy. Type 1 diabetes costs the economy a total of $2.9 billion annually through a range of direct and indirect costs. Direct costs resulting from providing health care, formal care, income support and welfare payments are estimated at $1 billion annually. The mental wellbeing of people affected by type 1 diabetes comprises part of the indirect costs of the condition, which is estimated as being a $1.9 billion cost to the economy. This is because people with type 1 diabetes are five times more likely to experience depression and 1.8 times more likely to experience anxiety than the general population. Of people with type 1 diabetes, 87 per cent describe their quality of life as negative. Parents and carers also present with higher rates of stress and mental illness. The year 2021 marks a century since the discovery of insulin—a discovery which has undoubtedly been a lifesaver for those suffering from type 1 diabetes. However, there are still significant, and often unseen, challenges for people with type 1 diabetes, and it is clear that ongoing support from the government and providing access for all to life-changing diabetes technologies is the key to reducing burdens and improving wellbeing.
Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill 2020; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill 2020. The expanding threat of cybersecurity vulnerability and malicious...
I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill 2020. The expanding threat of cybersecurity vulnerability and malicious cyberactivity has become increasingly evident in recent years. While Australia has enjoyed relative security in this regard, the incidence of cyberattacks, ransomware and the exploitation of system vulnerabilities has been increasing in frequency, scale and sophistication in recent years. In Australia, recent high-profile cybersecurity incidents affecting government departments, including parliamentary networks, major logistics and transport companies, the health sector, education providers and media companies have brought public attention to this issue. Internationally, there have been cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, including water services and airports. In the year 2019-20, the Australian Cyber Security Centre reported 2,266 cybersecurity incidents with just over one-third of those incidents coming from critical infrastructure companies and assets. However, the ASD has said that this is expected to be just a fraction of the number of cyber incidents affecting critical infrastructure, given the voluntary nature of reporting. The Australian Cyber Security Centre notes that phishing and spear phishing remain the most common methods used by cyberadversaries to gain access to networks or to distribute malicious content. Typically, this involves an unsuspecting user executing or opening a file that they received via email as part of a spear-phishing campaign. The ASD has also publicly noted that, alongside the increasing sophistication of cybercriminals, the likelihood and severity of cyberattacks is also increasing due to our growing dependence on new information technology platforms and interconnected devices and systems. While the 5G mobile network will underpin Australia's transition to a more digital economy and the internet and internet connected devices will enable a greater flow of information and efficiencies than ever before, it also makes us more vulnerable to significant threats to our infrastructure, our information and systems more broadly. It's against this background that the SOCI bill was first introduced late last year and, indeed, the explanatory memorandum to this bill makes the point very clearly: Critical infrastructure is increasingly interconnected and interdependent, delivering efficiencies and economic benefits to operations. However, connectivity without proper safeguards creates vulnerabilities that can deliberately or inadvertently cause disruption and result in cascading consequences across our economy, security and sovereignty. … … … … the interconnected nature of our critical infrastructure means that compromise of one essential function can have a domino effect that degrades or disrupts others. Because of these factors, the amendments in this bill were designed to enhance the obligations in the SOCI act and expand its coverage to sectors including communications, financial services and markets, data storage and processing, defence industry, higher education and research, energy, food and grocery, health care and medical, space technology, transport, water and sewerage. Following its introduction in December 2020, the bill was referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security later that month. The committee received over 80 submissions to this inquiry and held a number of private and public hearings. As is noted in the advisory report that the PJCIS tabled on 29 September 2021, while there was general acknowledgement from all submitters of the level of the threat and the need to do more, there were a number of conflicting views and opinions over elements of the bill. Before coming to those conflicting views or issues, and the government's response to the PJCIS advisory report, it is worth noting some of the evidence presented to the committee regarding the level of the threat. When outlining these threats and the increasing challenge of preparing, hardening and countering assets, the secretary of the Department of Home Affairs said this to the committee: Cyberattacks will soon reach global pandemic proportions. This has been building for about five years but has accelerated over the course of the COVID pandemic. … … … Basic cybersecurity protections will always help, but malicious actors, such as cybercriminals, state sponsored actors and state actors themselves will defeat the best defences that firms, families and individuals can buy. We have to do what we can, of course, to defend our own networks and devices against known vulnerabilities. However, just as we do not rely on home security alarms and door locks to deal with serious and organised crime, we cannot leave firms, families and individuals on the field on their own. Evidence at the committee was also received from a panel of experts, and one of those experts in the public hearing on 9 July highlighted the shift in the cyberthreat environment. Mr Chris Krebs noted: … there have been three strategic shifts over the last several years in the threat actor landscape. First … was ransomware and criminal actors. … … … I think the second strategic shift that we've seen was probably over the last two to three years, where, rather than go after their primary targets through the front door, the intelligence apparatus of our adversaries—traditionally, from the US perspective at least, we call that Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, but obviously there are others—have sought to effectively use the global ICT ecosystem, the systems we use on a daily basis, as a real-time collection apparatus. … … … The third and final strategic shift that I'd suggest we really prioritise is a shifting to functional disruptions and moving away from purely reconnaissance and intelligence collection. The committee also heard evidence that the rise of cyber-enabled crime and security threats has not been counted evenly by entities and that there has been an uneven investment in cybersecurity. There are companies out there who have been spending almost a billion dollars a year on cybersecurity programs, which is clearly a significant investment, but it's also true that that is not consistent across any industry anywhere. As noted earlier, while the need for reforms was not contested in evidence to the inquiry, a number of significant concerns were expressed about aspects of the bill and the process taken to develop it. The detail on these is found in the PJCIS advisory report, and I will outline a number of them. The first of those regards the timeline for the co-design of rules and economic modelling. There was concern that there was insufficient time for that to be done. A second concern that was raised by a number of submitters was around the variation in the breadth and specificity in the definitions of what would be included and what a critical infrastructure asset is. That caused concern in various sectors that the definitions were either too specific or too broad. Another concern was the unknown regulatory burden of positive security obligations. Then there was a concern about the time frames outlined in the bill for the notification of cybersecurity incidents to ASD under proposed part 2B. The final concern raised was that the potential reach of the powers in the bill was not being accompanied by appropriate authorisation or oversight mechanisms in the eyes of some. Ultimately, as noted in the advisory report, the PJCIS, a bipartisan committee, whilst strongly supporting the aims of the bill, came to the conclusion that it would need a significant amount of redrafting to pass in its entirety in a way that was going to ensure maximum buy-in and maximum understanding. The committee reached the conclusion that that would be required to be able to respond to the level of concerns that had been raised in an appropriate fashion. The committee's concern was that doing so would significantly delay the time-critical elements of the bill. As a result of that, the PJCIS made 14 recommendations in the advisory report, including splitting the bill into two separate bills with a first bill to incorporate the measures to respond to cyberincidents and cyberincident reporting as well as associated definitions and powers. What we are discussing today is actually the government's response to the PJCIS report and, in particular, the recommendation to split the bill into two separate bills. The amendments in what we're discussing today are effectively creating the first of those bills. The key measures retained in this particular bill include: first, government assistance to relevant entities for critical infrastructure sector assets in response to serious cybersecurity incidents that impact on Australia's critical infrastructure assets. Second is the mechanism by which cyberincident reporting to the ASD may be required by responsible entities for critical infrastructure assets that are subject to cybersecurity incidents. Thirdly, it has expanded the definition of 'critical infrastructure assets' to include assets across the 11 industry sectors, so increasing them from four to 11. Importantly, this bill also extends—this concern was raised, and so has been actively addressed—the period for making a written cybersecurity incident report to the ASD. It also addresses another concern that had been raised by increasing the level of consultation and oversight which is going to be carried out as the next bill is developed. By way of finishing, there is no doubt that cybersecurity threats are very real and potentially very significant, and doing something as soon as possible is imperative. The bipartisan committee, the PJCIS, acknowledges this very real threat but also identifies significant concerns with the draft bill which could potentially undermine it achieving its aims and goals. On this point I note the criticism from earlier opposition speakers, although I note that none of them actually sat on the committee. They criticised the government's approach on this bill and the failure to get the legislation perfect the first time. If only it were remotely possible to draft perfect legislation for anything or to have a perfect process for anything. I also dismiss those criticisms because this legislation concerns an area that involves many different sectors facing many different threats, and they are evolving in a very fast-changing landscape. We heard in the evidence that was given to the committee and which I cited earlier that some of these threats are only just emerging. The third wave of what we are now concerned about is actually just emerging. It's not that we've been sitting back and watching all this happen before responding. A lot of these threats, and their increase and their severity, have been within the last three to five years, if not in the last 12 to 18 months. The fact that the PJCIS works in the way that it does—that it gets the opportunity to have inquiries into bills and to hear from experts and then to effectively give recommendations to the government in a bipartisan way, pointing out issues that have emerged through that process—is to me a sign that democracy is working and that there are good checks and balances. I believe that the fact that the minister and the government responded to the recommendations of the committee reflects responsible and sound governance by this government. I commend this bill to the House.