Perin Davey's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
type: channel
language: en-gb
creator: OpenAustralia.org, mprss.php script
date: 2025-09-15T23:05:13+00:00
items: Valedictory | Parliamentary Representation | Senate debates
items: Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | Senate debates
items: Queensland: Natural Disasters | Statements by Senators | Senate debates
items: Local Content Broadcasting; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
items: Stronger Communities Program; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
items: Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
items: Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | Senate debates
items: Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
items: Australia: Natural Disasters | Statements by Senators | Senate debates
items: Defence Service Homes Amendment (Insurance) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | Senate debates
items: Agriculture Industry | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
items: Bureau of Meteorology | Statements by Senators | Senate debates
items: g134.1
items: Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates

Valedictory | Parliamentary Representation | Senate debates
type: item
description: I rise not just for myself but to recognise, on behalf of the Nationals in this place, the friend that is Linda Reynolds. She has been a friend to all of us. I think it was Senator Cash who said...
encoded: I rise not just for myself but to recognise, on behalf of the Nationals in this place, the friend that is Linda Reynolds. She has been a friend to all of us. I think it was Senator Cash who said Linda lives by the 'pay it forward' ethos. You do so in spades. I am relatively new to this place, having been elected in 2019, and I consider myself one of the lucky ones, because I am a beneficiary of the women, like Linda, who have come before me. I came into this place and I had a defence minister who was a female and who had been the first female brigadier in the Army Reserve. As a former Army reservist myself, I knew of you already. So she was already on a pedestal when I walked into this place. But, Linda, we had Marise Payne, Senator Cash and my colleague Senator Bridget McKenzie, who, as a group, wrapped their arms around all of the new women who walked into this place and said: 'Your experience will not be like ours. Your experience is going to be better, and we will make this place better for women.' And you have done that. All of your colleagues at the cabinet table at that time did that, and so I am forever grateful to have had the privilege of coming in when I did, when there was that generosity of spirit, that real support of women supporting women, and I knew that people like you had my back. That's why I will just say that it was with absolute horror that I saw what you went through. I knew that there was no way that the Linda Reynolds I knew could have been guilty of what she was being accused of. But I don't want to dwell on that, because I want to dwell on all your other achievements. You've spoken on the modern slavery legacy that you leave, and it is true. It will continue to lead to genuine change right across the globe, because I know you're not leaving it alone; you are going to continue to work in that space, and that is fantastic. I've already mentioned the support you've given to women, the work on gender reform that you are truly committed to. It…
date: 2025-03-26T20:30:00+00:00

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | Senate debates
type: item
description: Let's make no mistake as to why we're here today debating this bill, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025. It is because the coalition...
encoded: Let's make no mistake as to why we're here today debating this bill, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025. It is because the coalition has led on this issue. For the last almost 18 months, the coalition has been leading the way to support the salmon industry in Tasmania and in fact right across Australia. Labor has been brought kicking and screaming to the realisation that something needs to be done to protect the salmon industry. But, even in trying to do something right by the salmon industry, they're not getting it right. They can't do it. They can't bring themselves to do it. What Labor is trying to do with this bill today is to win votes, not to support a vital and crucial industry for the Tasmanian economy. The Prime Minister is about saving his own job, not about saving the Tasmanian salmon industry—and, let's face it, this bill is certainly not about saving the job of the Minister for the Environment and Water, Tanya Plibersek. This is just the last round in a long-running stoush between the Prime Minister and his environment minister and, to a wider extent, the clearly divided views within the Labor Party itself on environmental policy. This legislation is about factional games. It's about dealing with internal warfare, and it's about political fixes inside the Labor Party—a party absolutely desperate to cling to government at any cost. The salmon industry in Tasmania has been dragged through green tape, red tape and sheer obfuscation by this government, and, at the heart of it, it is the workers who have been living with the uncertainty. It is the workers who have had concerns about their future and the future of the industry that they love and that they are rightly proud of, and it is about the future of those workers who secure such an important economic industry for Tasmania that is—let's face it—enjoyed by all Australians. Who doesn't love a good Aussie smoked salmon blini? The environment mini…
date: 2025-03-26T11:53:00+00:00

Queensland: Natural Disasters | Statements by Senators | Senate debates
type: item
description: I rise today to talk about an ex. Like many exes, this one left behind a trail of destruction and heartbreak. Yes, I'm talking about Alfred. I want to take this moment to thank the many...
encoded: I rise today to talk about an ex. Like many exes, this one left behind a trail of destruction and heartbreak. Yes, I'm talking about Alfred. I want to take this moment to thank the many volunteers and frontline services, the SES, the councils and even the Australian Defence Force, who sandbagged, who got out there, who prepared and who were on hand literally in the eye of the storm. But I also want to thank those who come along afterwards to help clean up and mop up and to offer support when people are feeling that heartbreak. Thank you to Disaster Relief Australia volunteers, who come in and help with the clean-up, the logistics and the management of recovery efforts. Thank you to the many insurance assessors—yes, believe it or not—and the call centres who are currently dealing with more than 74,000 claims and counting. Please, I ask them, make it as easy as possible for the claimants. Thank you to the charities like GIVIT who are on the ground assisting, assessing the need but also making sure that charity dollars are spent in communities to help local economies recover. And thank you to the stayers—organisations like the Red Cross and others who work in the community recovery centres, who sit down and work with people to support them and address their needs. Those volunteers are there not just for the days and the weeks but for the months and the years that it takes for some of our most traumatised communities to recover. To all those quiet volunteers and supporters I say a very sincere and heartfelt thank you.
date: 2025-03-25T13:42:00+00:00

Local Content Broadcasting; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
type: item
description: When I recite my ABCs, I end with 'X, Y, Zed'. The reason for that is that I'm a Play School girl, not a Sesame Street girl. Play School is Australian content. We want to see more Australian...
encoded: When I recite my ABCs, I end with 'X, Y, Zed'. The reason for that is that I'm a Play School girl, not a Sesame Street girl. Play School is Australian content. We want to see more Australian content, and this government promised us Australian content. But, like so on many issues, this government is quite happy to break their promises. We've seen it on superannuation, we've seen it on stage 3 tax cuts and now we see it on what they were so staunch and so proud about. In the arts sector, they've broken their promise to deliver Australian content quotas for streaming platforms. This promise was made in light of that, when we were in government, Paul Fletcher, the former Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts, worked with industry and proposed a way forward to develop a content quota regime. We had a change of government. Prior to the change of government the former shadow minister, Tony Burke—at Woodford Folk Festival no less—promised in the summer of 2022 that, if they were elected to government, they would deliver content quotas for streaming platforms. Maybe he thought they wouldn't win; you don't have to worry about a promise made in opposition because you'll never have to deliver. But win they did, so he committed to deliver it and then put a deadline on it. He said that they would have content quotas in place by 1 July 2024. In May 2024, an options paper was released, and they were investigating content quotas on revenue or content quotas on expenditure. They were at least making some progress—while making everyone participating in the consultation sign non-disclosure agreements. Again I'm standing here highlighting the lack of transparency of this government and its reliance on non-disclosure agreements. What have we heard since May 2024? We heard, at the Senate estimates at that time, that the department was still working on the scheme to inform cabinet decisions. Since then, nada. We've heard rumours that the hold-up is now beca…
date: 2025-02-13T16:14:00+00:00

Stronger Communities Program; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
type: item
description: I'm not saying I want to shut down Rex Airlines—thank you; I'll take that—in no way. I'm saying I fly Rex Airlines. But what investigations have this government done to investigate...
encoded: I'm not saying I want to shut down Rex Airlines—thank you; I'll take that—in no way. I'm saying I fly Rex Airlines. But what investigations have this government done to investigate all opportunities to keep Rex Airlines or regional routes serviced before they've gone into agreeing to a massive debt on behalf of the Australian taxpayer? Our position in the Nationals has been that we must ensure that regional routes continue to be serviced. But there are options, and we are not convinced that the Labor government has considered all those options. The call for the production of documents is so that we can reassure ourselves that the Labor government has considered all options to ensure that our regional routes continue to be serviced so rural and regional Australians are not left out.
date: 2025-02-13T15:22:00+00:00

Stronger Communities Program; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
type: item
description: What we have seen time and time again from the Prime Minister and the government is a lack of transparency and an absolute unwillingness to actually produce documents requested by this...
encoded: What we have seen time and time again from the Prime Minister and the government is a lack of transparency and an absolute unwillingness to actually produce documents requested by this chamber—documents on their programs! With the Stronger Communities Program, if there were nothing to hide, you would think they would be willing to present the documents we're asking for without fear or favour. You would think they would be willing to shout from the rooftops what a success that program has been, but clearly not. It should be a great program, delivering for our regional communities and, importantly, delivering for our volunteer organisations. I want to tell you how important grant programs are, like what the Stronger Communities Program should be, like what we had when we were in government—the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, which was highly successful and highly sought after and delivered a huge amount of benefit for regional communities. There is not one community that I have visited that hasn't shown me a community infrastructure facility and said, 'This was delivered through your Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program,' like the former government's Building Better Regions Fund, where communities identify what they need. Organisations like our state emergency services are run by volunteers, who have sheds and just need that little bit of support to upgrade, to do some maintenance or, in the case of so many, put in female change rooms. A lot of our regional and rural fire services' sheds were built at a time when, unfortunately, not many female volunteers were welcomed. Times have changed, but infrastructure has not caught up. These organisations used things like the Building Better Regions Fund, used things like the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, and should be using the Stronger Communities Program to help make their places more welcoming for female volunteers, for volunteers of different abilities and for volunteers f…
date: 2025-02-13T15:22:00+00:00

Stronger Communities Program; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
type: item
description: It is that time of day!
encoded: It is that time of day!
date: 2025-02-13T15:22:00+00:00

Stronger Communities Program; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
type: item
description: I too question why there's no transparency on Albo airways. I'm wondering whether I want to come fly with him. 'Let's fly, let's fly away.' It'd be lovely to fly Albo airlines. I wonder if there...
encoded: I too question why there's no transparency on Albo airways. I'm wondering whether I want to come fly with him. 'Let's fly, let's fly away.' It'd be lovely to fly Albo airlines. I wonder if there are also—
date: 2025-02-13T15:22:00+00:00

Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
type: item
description: by leave—I move: (1) Amendment (1), omit "substitute '4'", substitute "substitute '5'". (2) Amendment (2), subclause 4(1), omit "A Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and...
encoded: by leave—I move: (1) Amendment (1), omit "substitute '4'", substitute "substitute '5'". (2) Amendment (2), subclause 4(1), omit "A Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade", substitute "The Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee". (3) Amendment (2), after clause 4, insert: 5 Review of amendments in Schedule 9 The Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee must: (a) begin a review of the amendments in Schedule 9 to this Act as soon as practicable after the day this Act receives the Royal Assent; and (b) report the Committee's findings to the Senate by 29 August 2025. While we support the government's amendments, we are moving these amendments to include a review, should it pass, of the veterans commissioner to be. The reason why we believe this review must take place is that their amendment, which would add schedule 9 to the Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024, has come about at the last minute. There has been a lack of consultation. The veterans community was taken by surprise when they read about their amendment. The veterans community has been engaged from the outset of developing this bill. They have participated in good faith. They participated in the recent Senate inquiry into the substantive bill, at which time this commissioner was not foreshadowed. At that point in time, the veterans community understood that an interim commissioner had been appointed who would work on developing a framework for a legislated commission to be in place by September this year. Their amendment fast-tracks that process and puts the cart before the horse, so to speak, and veterans have not been consulted. Veterans are gravely concerned about what it means and how it will be rolled out. So, briefly, we are moving these amendments to ensure that the Senate can undertake the due diligence and scrutiny that should have happened with an amendment of this scale. I …
date: 2025-02-12T18:05:00+00:00

Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | Senate debates
type: item
description: The Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024 has been far too long in the making given the urgency it should have received. This legislation is...
encoded: The Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024 has been far too long in the making given the urgency it should have received. This legislation is in response to the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide's first recommendation in its interim report, which was handed down in August 2022. The recommendation found that the veteran compensation and rehabilitation legislative system is so complicated that it actually adversely affects the mental health of some veterans and serving ADF members and can contribute to suicidality. The words 'can contribute to suicidality' should have raised a sense of urgency, particularly on an issue that essentially has bipartisan support. Work on simplifying and harmonising the system should have been a priority even as the royal commission completed its vital and sensitive investigations. Yet it took almost two years for the bill to first be introduced, passing the House of Representatives on 6 November last year after debate originally opened in August. Since then, it has languished on the Senate's Notice Paper. It was first put on the paper on 18 November, and it has been on a veritable roller-coaster, being pulled up and then pushed back on the Notice Paper, going up and down, which shows you the level of priority this government has put on securing the health and wellbeing of our veteran personnel. We must ask: how many more will be let down and feel abandoned before the changes of this bill finally come about, given they will not come into effect until July 2026, nearly four years after the original recommendation was made? We currently have about 300,000 veterans in Australia. We currently have about 57,000 serving personnel. So we have a great many reasons why we need to get this legislation correct, to get it passed and to get it working. The royal commission reported that 1,677 veteran suicides had occurred between 1997 and 2021, but it is widely recognised that this fig…
date: 2025-02-12T11:26:00+00:00

Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
type: item
description: I just want to put on record the opposition's position on this amendment on sheet 2882. The ART, under this government, is experiencing an absolutely unprecedented blowout in its case load. In...
encoded: I just want to put on record the opposition's position on this amendment on sheet 2882. The ART, under this government, is experiencing an absolutely unprecedented blowout in its case load. In the migration and protection space, its load increased by 6,000 cases in just the first six weeks. When the coalition were in government, we introduced the fast-track process, through the Immigration Assessment Authority, to deal with Labor's previous massive backlog of unauthorised maritime arrivals. It was logical, sensible and appropriate. It was an appropriate response to Labor's incredible failures on border protection during the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years. The fast-track process that we established through the IAA was able to resolve those cases very quickly, usually in a matter of weeks rather than months. And the overturn rates were in line with other decisions of the tribunal. Essentially what the Greens want to do with this amendment is reopen every single refugee case that was finally decided by the IAA. This would almost inevitably lead to a massive increase in the burden that is already placed on the tribunal. It will increase costs and increase delays for everyone involved, including the people the Greens say they're trying to help. There is no public benefit in this amendment. It's not an appropriate measure and it should be opposed.
date: 2025-02-12T11:12:00+00:00

Australia: Natural Disasters | Statements by Senators | Senate debates
type: item
description: What a start to 2025 we've had, with flood and fire at the two ends of the east coast. In Victoria, the fire season started before Christmas, when the Grampians National Park started burning. By...
encoded: What a start to 2025 we've had, with flood and fire at the two ends of the east coast. In Victoria, the fire season started before Christmas, when the Grampians National Park started burning. By last weekend, as the fire was contained, 230,000 hectares had been lost. As well as the physical damage, we saw the normal Christmas holiday rush of tourists gone. That has affected businesses right through the region. From the outset, I want to thank all the volunteer firefighters, their support teams and their families. At the same time, we've had floods in Far North Queensland. The region has been battered by tropical lows. Towns have had metres of rain and then some, just when locals thought the worst had passed. Homes have been lost, shops are without food, power is out and, unfortunately, in this case, lives have been lost. There have been two disasters in two states. Both states had visits from the Prime Minister, and both had commitments from the federal government that all assistance—whatever is required—would be provided to support the affected communities. But, when it comes to putting the rubber to the road, the two states are worlds apart. It truly is a tale of two different disasters. The Queensland government moved immediately. Assessments were made, requests were submitted and a range of assistance measures were announced for businesses and primary industries, as well as for people. In Victoria, now that the fires are under control, farms and businesses are still waiting to see if assistance will be offered to them. Councils have assistance, but businesses and farms are still waiting for the state government to do the necessary assessments. They must happen, and they must happen soon. The federal government stands ready. We will support the federal government to get it out the door. (Time expired)
date: 2025-02-11T13:54:00+00:00

Defence Service Homes Amendment (Insurance) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | Senate debates
type: item
description: Let's be clear: we should all be thanking the Labor Party for us still sitting here at 20 past eight at night when we could have had the Defence Service Homes Amendment (Insurance) Bill 2025...
encoded: Let's be clear: we should all be thanking the Labor Party for us still sitting here at 20 past eight at night when we could have had the Defence Service Homes Amendment (Insurance) Bill 2025 dealt with at 10.30 this morning. It's a non-controversial bill that absolutely has the support of both sides. We've even had the minister in the other place commending the government for their approach to this bill in a non-controversial, bipartisan manner. And yet it then comes to this place, and we have the Labor Party playing games with it instead of rushing it through in a non-controversial way first thing this morning. It could have been done and dusted, and here we are tonight. We will be supporting this bill. This bill fixes a problem that was faced. It will sort things out. We have seen the massive floods up in Townsville, and we know the amount of defence housing up in far North Queensland and in the Townsville area. What we don't want are any question marks over their insurability and the Defence Services Homes Insurance scheme, which is currently administered by the Department of Veterans' Affairs and provides vital home building insurance to all current and former members of the Australian Defence Force and, can I make it clear, for defence force families, widows and widowers. It is vital that we get this bill through. I'm grateful that it is non-controversial; I just wish we didn't have to play games.
date: 2025-02-10T20:18:00+00:00

Agriculture Industry | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
type: item
description: The chair of the Australian Food and Agriculture Taskforce, Mark van Dyck, has said, '44 per cent of farmers believed Australia was losing its competitive edge on the global stage.' When will Mr...
encoded: The chair of the Australian Food and Agriculture Taskforce, Mark van Dyck, has said, '44 per cent of farmers believed Australia was losing its competitive edge on the global stage.' When will Mr Albanese apologise to our farmers for making it harder to feed and clothe Australians and for breaking his promise that they would be better off under Labor?
date: 2025-02-06T14:40:00+00:00

Agriculture Industry | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
type: item
description: Senator Wong, farmers are directly impacted by Labor's cost-of-living crisis, including by higher electricity prices, which are up by 32 per cent; higher insurance and finance costs; and Labor's...
encoded: Senator Wong, farmers are directly impacted by Labor's cost-of-living crisis, including by higher electricity prices, which are up by 32 per cent; higher insurance and finance costs; and Labor's truckie tax, which is increasing the cost of getting the produce to market. Why does Labor continue to pursue policies that squeeze out farmers?
date: 2025-02-06T14:38:00+00:00

Agriculture Industry | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
type: item
description: Apologies.
encoded: Apologies.
date: 2025-02-06T14:36:00+00:00

Agriculture Industry | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
type: item
description: My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Food prices have increased by 12 per cent under Labor and could rise even further as farmers and food processors face...
encoded: My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Food prices have increased by 12 per cent under Labor and could rise even further as farmers and food processors face increased costs. According to farm performance reports from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, ABARES, dairy farmers' costs have increased 7.4 per cent, and sheep and beef farmers' costs have risen by 14.7 per cent. SPC are in the news today with increases for processing. Why is Labor making it harder and more expensive for farmers to supply the fresh food Australian families need? Why won't Mr Albanese finally admit that Aussie farmers are not better off under Labor?
date: 2025-02-06T14:35:00+00:00

Bureau of Meteorology | Statements by Senators | Senate debates
type: item
description: On 19 September 2023, the Bureau of Meteorology—who we all lovingly refer to as the BOM, despite their failed attempt at changing their brand during desperate floods—announced that an...
encoded: On 19 September 2023, the Bureau of Meteorology—who we all lovingly refer to as the BOM, despite their failed attempt at changing their brand during desperate floods—announced that an El Nino event was pending. By January 2024, the headline on the ABC read 'Farmers frustrated after destocking following BOM's incorrect El Nino forecast'. Sky News had 'BOM's El Nino predictions "cost a lot of farmers a lot of money"'. This one from Beef Central asked the crucial question 'Did BOM's El Nino forecast bomb the 2023 cattle market?' The BOM's forecasts are crucial to regional Australia, not just for farmers and agricultural businesses but also for our communities. At the time, despite people saying that the bureau's predictions were horrifically inaccurate, people were cutting the BOM some slack. One Victorian farmer quoted by the ABC at the time said he did not hold the BOM solely responsible as it provides, after all, a forecast, not gospel. But I wonder how those people feel now, after reading a report by the Australian National Audit Office. It turns out that the BOM has been scrimping on its asset management and maintenance program. The BOM is responsible for providing weather, water, climate and ocean services across Australia and also to overseas clients. They currently have an operating budget of $440 million a year from the federal government, plus about $100 million annually from external sources through commercial enterprises. It should be managing $1.3 billion in non-financial assets, and the observing network assets make up approximately 28 per cent of the bureau's total asset base. The bureau conducted a body of work between 2018 and 2020 to model the cost of their asset management and maintenance program. They made a pitch for extra funding for this, which was duly granted in the 2021-22 budget by the former Liberal and Nationals government to the tune of $225.6 million in additional funding over three years, converting to $143 million each year after that, …
date: 2025-02-05T12:25:00+00:00

g134.1
type: item
title: Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024, Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024, Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024 | Matters of Urgency | Senate debates
description: Everyone knows that I'm not a very sporty person, but my children were gymnasts. They would have had no hope of competing against the Prime Minister's ability to backflip, forward somersault and...
encoded: Everyone knows that I'm not a very sporty person, but my children were gymnasts. They would have had no hope of competing against the Prime Minister's ability to backflip, forward somersault and finish with a triple pike without breaking a sweat. That's what we've seen here. We saw the nature positive bill go through the lower house, with the support of the teals—sorry; apparently they like being called 'community independents' today—and the Greens. We saw it listed for debate in the Senate. Then we saw it withdrawn from the listings, and we saw it brought back, to be debated this week. I was asked last week, when I was doing a TV interview: 'What is the opposition's position on this? Has the opposition changed their mind?' I said at the time, 'The only person that I'm aware of who's changed their mind on bringing this bill forward again for debate is the Prime Minister.' And—lo and behold!—he's changed his mind again. Now, when it was listed last year, we heard from the Premier of Western Australia his opposition to the bill, calling out the immense damage this legislation would have on that state's mining based economy. Make no mistake—Western Australia would not be the only state impacted, but at least their Premier is honest enough to have called it out. The new year must have been a really good one for the Prime Minister, because he forgot that he'd withdrawn the bill last year and it appeared on our Notice Paper again. To bring back this bill was a slap in the face for Western Australia. It showed that Western Australia had been held in total contempt by this government. I want to commend Mia Davies, the Nationals' candidate for the seat of Bullwinkel, for her tireless work in calling out not only this bill and the damage it would do to Western Australia but also this government's appalling live sheep export ban. So the bill was relisted, but the phones must have been burning with calls between Western Australia and the Lodge, because over the weekend the Prim…
date: 2025-02-04T16:08:00+00:00

Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
type: item
description: Can I ask that the question be divided with respect to amendment (14) and the proposed item 24C in amendment (9), to give effect to the amendments on sheet 2990.
encoded: Can I ask that the question be divided with respect to amendment (14) and the proposed item 24C in amendment (9), to give effect to the amendments on sheet 2990.
date: 2024-11-27T12:11:00+00:00