Stephen Bates's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
International Relations: Australia and the United States of America | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister still. Given Trump's attacks on democracy and Western institutions, and even threatening our allies and even the PBS, why would you invite him to Australia?
My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, why would you invite Donald Trump to Australia when you've got a Temu Trump sitting right opposite you?
Tropical Cyclone Alfred | Statements on Indulgence | House debates
I want to start by saying, from the bottom of my heart, thank you to the people in Brisbane for their help preparing and recovering from Cyclone Alfred. In the wake of heavy wind and flooding, I...
I want to start by saying, from the bottom of my heart, thank you to the people in Brisbane for their help preparing and recovering from Cyclone Alfred. In the wake of heavy wind and flooding, I want to extend my deepest gratitude to every individual and volunteer organisation that stepped up. The resilience, community spirit and unwavering dedication were truly inspiring. In the two weeks that followed the heavy wind and rain, here's some of what we were able to achieve through my electorate office: we had 158 volunteers, 223 volunteer shifts and 892 volunteer hours. We moved eight tonnes of green waste clear from gardens, driveways and verges. Four-hundred meals were served to residents in power affected suburbs, and dozens of personal drop-offs of care packages for residents with mobility issues were made as well. As always, I want to give a heartfelt thank you to all of our emergency responders: the SES, Queensland fire and emergency services, paramedics and frontline workers, who all worked tirelessly to keep the community safe. Finally, to every Brisbane resident who followed the safety advice, checked in on loved ones and showed resilience in the face of adversity—thank you. Your courage and unity reminds everyone that together we can overcome anything. Unfortunately, these extreme weather events are only going to become much more common. The climate crisis is something we are already feeling; 2024 was the hottest year in recorded history and the hottest for Australia's oceans. Month after month, we're in a world that is hotter, wetter and more turbulent, with extreme weather events happening more and more frequently and with frighteningly more intensity. Tropical cyclones have long been a reality for many in Australia and the Pacific, but climate change is making them more intense and destructive, and they're moving further south. As our climate rapidly changes, the waters off Australia's east coast are becoming exceptionally warm, providing the perfect conditions for stronger winds, heavy rainfall and larger storms. These cyclones now intensify faster, reach higher wind speeds and produce greater rainfall. They can also maintain their strength for longer and move more slowly, increasing the devastation in affected areas. With sea levels now 20 centimetres higher due to the continued burning of fossil fuels, storm surges and coastal flooding are becoming even more dangerous. According to the Climate Council, over a 24-hour period between 9 March and 10 March, Brisbane received a record-breaking 230 millimetres of rainfall, while lower Springbrook in South East Queensland recorded a staggering 814 millimetres between 3 March and 9 March—that is 80 per cent of Brisbane's average annual rainfall. As ocean temperatures continue to rise, scientists are warning us that cyclones will track further south along the east coast, threatening densely populated areas that are unprepared for this kind of extreme weather. Most homes and infrastructure in Brisbane are simply not designed to withstand cyclonic conditions. Australians are already experiencing more extreme fire conditions, longer and more intense heatwaves and heavier rainfall-driven flooding due to pollution from coal, oil and gas which is driving climate change. The financial toll continues to mount with insurance costs skyrocketing. There are homes in my electorate that are already entirely uninsurable. Australians are now paying $30 billion more for insurance than they were just a decade ago—that's more than double the rate of inflation. Families, renters and retirees shouldn't have to pay skyrocketing insurance premiums for a climate crisis that they did not cause. The filthy rich coal and gas companies caused the climate crisis, and they should pick up the tab. In yesterday's budget, far from making fossil fuel companies pay anywhere near their fair share, the government has handed over $56 billion in subsidies to them. Meanwhile, the Albanese government has continued to approve new coal and gas projects since coming to power. This will make the climate crisis worse, make these disasters more frequent and make insurance more expensive. The shameful watering down of environment laws rammed through the House yesterday may well pave the way for even more coal and gas projects. We need a government that puts the environment and climate before the entitlement of the fossil fuel industry. Our communities are sick of cleaning up again and again from the impacts of climate change while governments don't do enough to combat one of the greatest crises of our time. The only way we will see real action on climate change is with a minority parliament with the Greens in the balance of power.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I move the amendment to the amendment circulated by the member for Fairfax in my name: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "The House declines...
I move the amendment to the amendment circulated by the member for Fairfax in my name: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "The House declines to give the bill a second reading and notes the government is using the cover of the budget to rush through legislation that trashes environment laws instead of passing laws to cut student debt and triple the bulk billing incentive for GPs". Yet again we have this Labor government rushing through a dirty deal with the coalition. This legislation seeks to trash our environment laws and push our precious native species to extinction. The Australian Conservation Foundation said today that this bill will mean nature is more poorly protected at the end of the Albanese government's three-year term than it was at the start of it. This prime minister came to office with claims that the captain's calls had ended. But today, with this bill, we see the Prime Minister rushing through legislation, all to placate polluting industries and lock in species extinction. Australia is facing an environmental crisis. We have one of the highest rates of species extinction in the world and ongoing destruction of our natural ecosystems. There is no question about it; our current environmental laws are failing to protect our biodiversity. Despite promises from this government, critical reforms continue to be delayed, all while leaving species and ecosystems vulnerable to further degradation. If you want to halt the extinction crisis then saying, 'We will get to it later. We will do it next time,' is not going to cut it. We must implement stronger enforceable environmental protections as a matter of urgency. But instead, this proposed legislation has sidelined science and sends our wildlife into extinction. It undermines legal protections and has far-reaching consequences for our community and planet. Environment laws are supposed to protect the environment, not greenlight destruction and extinction. Rushing these laws through under the cover of tonight's federal budget without proper scrutiny or consideration is disgusting. Australia is a country that is rich in biodiversity but poor in its protection. We are home to over 10 per cent of the world's biodiversity with unique species that exist nowhere else on earth. We have already lost multiple native species since European colonisation began, and hundreds more species are at risk of extinction, yet deforestation, habitat destruction and climate change continue largely unchecked due to weak environment laws and poor enforcement. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conversation Act, the EPBC Act, is supposed to be our primary environment law designed to protect these species and ecosystems but, for decades, it's failed to prevent environmental destruction. Loopholes, weak regulation and lack of political backbone from both major parties have allowed industries like fossil fuels and logging to push full steam ahead with projects that harm biodiversity. This bill would limit the ability to challenge fast approvals of harmful projects, making it even harder to protect endangered species and ecosystems from destructive developments. And if passed, this bill could prevent the legal review of past approvals that have contributed to environmental decline such as the expansion of the salmon industry in Tasmania's Macquarie Harbour, which has devastated the critically endangered Maugean skate's habitat. This Labor government came into power promising to strengthen environmental laws and establish an independent EPA to enforce them. But, of course, these critical reforms have been postponed or canned entirely and instead we have the proposed bill threatening to weaken environmental protections further. In what is expected to be our final sitting of this parliament, instead of working with the Greens and the crossbench to pass laws that will actually help Australians, Labor's working with the coalition to gut our environment laws. This bill could stop the Australian public from being able to demand coal and gas corporations be held accountable when their destructive projects are shown to be destroying nature. There would be no recourse or potential for course correction. There is nothing in this bill holding back the expansion of fossil fuel projects that will be a disaster for the climate. This bill is deceptively vague in its detail, and there are no explicit provisions excluding coal and gas approvals from this weakening of the environment laws. The government simply does not currently know what environment approvals this bill will apply to, and it certainly has no idea of the true scope to which it may apply. The government has given us merely hours to review this shameful bill. The initial analysis shows that decisions on up to 100 projects, including coal and gas mines, could be impacted. This bill is setting an unacceptable and destructive precedent to exempt polluting industries and actions from national environment law even when all the available scientific evidence shows those actions will likely send endangered species into extinction. Environment laws are supposed to protect the environment, not provide certainty to industries that they can continue to trash it. It's shameful that the Prime Minister is championing an industry that poisons our waterways and drives ancient wildlife into extinction. This proposed legislation that sidelines science will send the Maugean skate into extinction and likely will have far-reaching consequences way beyond Macquarie Harbour, all in the name of corporate profits. What this government should be doing is closing the loopholes that allow bypasses of environmental protections and ensuring that all major projects undergo rigorous environmental assessment—strengthening the EPBC, not weakening it. Without urgent action, Australia's extinction crisis will only get worse. The government must fulfil its promise to strengthen environmental protections before more species and ecosystems are lost forever. Now we have Labor promising they will fix our environment laws in the next term of government, after they promised to fix them in this term of government and now sit here in this chamber weakening them. If you're confused, it's because it's confusing. Australia needs stronger environment laws, not weaker ones. The government must abandon this bill and deliver on its promise to end the extinction crisis.
Taxation | Constituency Statements | House debates
According to Oxfam, $67,000 is how much the average billionaire in Australia makes every hour. It's over 1,300 times more than the average Australian. Last year the wealth of billionaires in this...
According to Oxfam, $67,000 is how much the average billionaire in Australia makes every hour. It's over 1,300 times more than the average Australian. Last year the wealth of billionaires in this country grew by more than eight per cent—roughly $28 billion or about $3.2 million per hour. All these numbers can sound overwhelming, unreal even. It's the dragon hoarding the medieval peasant towns' wealth—all this wealth being amassed in the pockets of the already megawealthy while the rest of the country sees living standards decline and life become more unaffordable. We are truly living through a new Gilded Age, watching economic inequality increase every year. The cost-of-living crisis did not create a new problem; it simply laid bare a problem that had been brewing for decades. According to research done by the Australia Institute, the wealth of the richest 200 people in this country has grown from the equivalent of 8.4 per cent of GDP in 2004 to 23.7 per cent now. This is wildly unsustainable. Our entire economy is based on the principle of supply and demand. If we continue down the path of more and more wealth being amassed in fewer and fewer hands, how does anyone expect our economy to survive? It can't and it won't. Billionaires and giant multinational companies calling the shots on policy and setting the framework for what is even considered possible in politics cannot last forever. I said before that we are living through a new Gilded Age; that age ended with the start of the Great Depression. If we do not learn from our past, we are just condemned to repeat it. So it's time for a new vision. We have a unique opportunity here in Australia, for better or worse, being about 10 years or so behind the US and UK. We have time to make the changes that we need, and it starts with making sure the ultrawealthy and the multinational corporations pay their fair share of tax. Everyone else does, so they should too. What's worse is they already do elsewhere. Soon after Norway discovered oil off their coast, they decided that wealth generated by a resource-rich country needed to be shared among everyone in society, not just the top 0.1 per cent. Their solution was a superprofits tax on oil companies. The revenue from the oil tax allowed Norway to invest in free universities, universal health care, impressive national infrastructure, renewable energy and a welfare system that ensures everyone can live a dignified life. That is the kind of policy we can make and the type of society we can have if we are not afraid to take on those with all the wealth and power. Making sure that billionaires and huge multinational corporations pay their fair share of tax means that we can get dental and mental health into Medicare, get 100 per cent renewable energy, build affordable housing, and ensure everyone can lead a dignified life. This vision is not radical. What is radical is to see the crises we are living through and then recommit to the status quo that the two major parties offer.
Taxation | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Currently billionaires are making out like bandits while everyone else is being squeezed. Yesterday the Greens announced a plan for Australia's 150...
My question is to the Prime Minister. Currently billionaires are making out like bandits while everyone else is being squeezed. Yesterday the Greens announced a plan for Australia's 150 billionaires to pay an annual 10 per cent billionaire tax on their net wealth, which would raise $50 billion over the decade. Prime Minister, do you agree it is time billionaires paid their fair share to ensure everyone can get access to the services they need, such as seeing the GP for free?
Social Security Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I rise to speak to the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes) Bill 2025. This bill is seeking to close a loophole identified in the social security legislation by the AAT in...
I rise to speak to the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes) Bill 2025. This bill is seeking to close a loophole identified in the social security legislation by the AAT in 2024. The consequences of this error are that for years the department and the government of the day have been misapplying the social security act, where participants were technically eligible for the higher independent disability support pension rate but were paid the lower rate. Although a drafting error, it calls into question the principles that underpin social security. The disability support pension is already a borderline poverty payment. The government should not be seeking endless ways to reduce it further. The Greens also have concerns about the scope of backpay that this bill is seeking to avoid. Participants are constantly forced to defend themselves against the state. We saw this at its peak with robodebt, but it endures through schemes like mutual obligations and Work for the Dole. It seems strange, then, for the government to seek to remedy an error that no-one cared to identify for nearly two decades. Time and time again we see participants punished for minor infractions while the government and departments throw up their hands and yell, 'Oops!' Not knowing your own legislation is not a simple mistake; it's an unbelievable oversight. Denying the higher independent rate on the mistake and understanding of an amendment from 2005 has genuine implications for participants. For these reasons the Greens will be opposing this bill. We need to seriously consider whether using the machinery of the state to make social security harder to access, more means-tested and more restricted is a genuinely productive use of time. I urge the government to take seriously all the other issues that plague the DSP. The starting point for any genuine reform should be the low rate of the DSP. As a borderline poverty payment, it forces many disabled people into a vicious cycle of poverty, fear and pain. Income support payments below the poverty line mean hunger, they mean illness and they mean homelessness. None of these realities are conducive to finding meaningful, sustainable work. Poverty can have dire impacts on your physical and mental health and your ability to find work and maintain relationships, regardless of whether you are 20 or 60. The tightening of eligibility for the disability support pension has also forced many people who are living with disability to rely on the lower rate under JobSeeker, which further entrenches poverty and disadvantage. Since 2007 the number of jobseekers with partial capacity to work has risen from 10 per cent to 43 per cent. Nearly half of all people on the poverty payment, JobSeeker, are incapacitated from work in some way. This has coincided with the tightening and restricting of the DSP. We see the punitive administration of the DSP in other ways with the partner income test. I would like to foreshadow that the Greens will be moving amendments in the Senate calling for an end to the overtly restrictive partner income test under the DSP. The partner income test traps disabled people in abusive relationships. This is by forcing people into dynamics of financial dependency, where they lose access to their own income. Beyond this, the partner income test also genuinely prevents members of the community from getting married out of fear of losing the DSP. Disabled participants should not be punished for pursuing relationships. It's regressive and genuinely undermines marriage equality. This is another instance of the state being used to punish rather than support. The government can't keep burying their heads in the sand and continuing to ignore the millions of renters, single parents, students, women and people with disabilities all doing it tough. Today there are more than three million Australians living in poverty, including one in six children. Many of those people are either unable to access income support or are relying on payments that are among the lowest in the OECD. Despite being one of the wealthiest countries on earth, successive Labor and coalition governments have made policy choices that deliberately keep people in poverty, including refusing to raise JobSeeker, youth allowance and the disability support pension. The evidence is clear: one of the single most effective ways to genuinely tackle the cost-of-living crisis is to raise the rates of income support payments. I urge the government to get their priorities in order. Tax breaks for property investors, giving hundreds of billions of dollars to billionaires and corporations, doesn't help the average Australian get through the cost-of-living crisis, and it does nothing for the millions struggling to survive on Centrelink payments. Poverty is impacting so many Australians, and it is only getting worse. With skyrocketing rents, interest rate rises and inflation, so many people are struggling to get by. From not being able to afford nutritious food, education and housing or the resources to get a job—these are all having a significant impact on people's mental health and wellbeing as well. Poverty is a political choice, and the Greens are fighting for a strong social safety net and a liveable wage that would raise all Centrelink payments above the Henderson poverty line.
Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
Would the member for Petrie be able to clarify, regarding those amendments you have moved, that you've moved only sheet 1? My understanding is that these amendments only go to the instant asset...
Would the member for Petrie be able to clarify, regarding those amendments you have moved, that you've moved only sheet 1? My understanding is that these amendments only go to the instant asset write-off and do not remove schedule 2 of the bill. I ask just because he referenced that during his speech, so I just want to clarify.
Australian Society | Statements by Members | House debates
That tells you all you need to know about the Liberals—that they cheer at that. Trump and these backers want to reshape the United States and now the world into a place where the only thing...
That tells you all you need to know about the Liberals—that they cheer at that. Trump and these backers want to reshape the United States and now the world into a place where the only thing that matters is profit and the bottom line. Now similar groups have appeared in Australia. Groups like Advance and Australians for Prosperity want to do to this country what their counterparts have done to the United States—divide us, carve us up and sell our society to the highest bidder. They will not be happy until our country is a hollowed-out shell, where everything is pay-to-play. Now we see the LNP begin to back them in and follow down the same path as the Republicans—making cuts that we will only find the details of after the election, slashing the Public Service and banning investment in renewables. What will help this country to stave off far-right groups and the undue influence of giant corporations in politics? It's policies that actually improve people's lives and protect the environmental—dental into Medicare, mental health into Medicare, 100 per cent renewable energy, tripling the bulk-billing incentive for everyone so everyone can see the GP for free again and making these giant multinationals and fossil fuel companies finally pay their fair share of tax. That is what I'm in this place fighting for, and that is how we stave off the far-right and corporate takeover of our democracy.
Over decades, well-funded far-right groups in the United States have been on a mission to destroy progressive politics and reshape the Republican Party to be one of division, destruction and...
Over decades, well-funded far-right groups in the United States have been on a mission to destroy progressive politics and reshape the Republican Party to be one of division, destruction and delusion. Now we have a second Trump presidency that promises to be even worse than the first.
Health Legislation Amendment (Improved Medicare Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I move, as an amendment to the amendment proposed by Ms Ley: That all words after "the" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "House, whilst not declining to give the bill a...
I move, as an amendment to the amendment proposed by Ms Ley: That all words after "the" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "House, whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading: (1) notes that: (a) Medicare cannot be a universal healthcare system while essential dental care is excluded; and (b) the Australian Dental Association's Annual Oral Health Survey found that over 60 per cent of Australians had delayed a trip to the dentist in the previous 12 months, with cost being the main barrier; and (2) calls on the Government to legislate the inclusion of dental care into Medicare". Medicare is crucial to Australia's healthcare system, and strengthening Medicare needs to be a top priority as Australians endure this cost-of-living crisis, because our healthcare system, as it stands right now, is struggling. It's becoming rarer by the day to find a bulk-billing GP, it's nearly impossible to access mental health care support without huge gap payments, and the cost of dental care has become so expensive that millions of Australians are putting it off entirely. A properly funded universal healthcare system actually saves the country money in the long run. It reduces poverty, creates jobs and drives economic productivity. It is achievable and desperately needed, as a matter of urgency, because everyone should be able to afford to go to the dentist when they need help. Too many Australians cannot access the dentist because it is too expensive, and more people are not eligible for public dentistry than ever before. As things stand, millions of Australians are putting off going to the dentist because they simply cannot afford it. It doesn't just lead to worse teeth; it leads to a host of other health concerns that also come from this lack of access. Now, I was really fortunate that, after I was elected to this place, I was able to afford, finally, to go to the dentist and get some fillings done, because I couldn't afford them while I was in my previous job, in retail. But, because I had waited so long, those fillings had become root canals, costing thousands and thousands more dollars than they previously would have. You shouldn't have to be elected to this place or rely on your income to be able to get access to life-saving and essential healthcare treatment, and that includes dentistry. I also had the fortunate experience of growing up in the UK, where, up until the age of 18, all your dentistry and orthodontics are actually covered by the National Health Service. I was able to get my teeth looked after. I was able to get orthodontics done, all without costing my family a penny, which was an incredible experience. Then we moved over here, and my family had to pay about $4,000 in orthodontics to get my braces removed. That's a worlds-apart experience of engaging with the healthcare system—about what could be and what families could look forward to, compared to the situation that we find ourselves in in this country. And we can't forget that, while Australians can't afford to go to a doctor or dentist in greater and greater numbers, we have one in three large corporations in this country paying no income tax. These large corporations can use all these various offsets and loopholes to get out of paying tax while everyday Australians cannot afford basic health care. The system is fundamentally broken, and we all know this. We all feel it. Now, we fix this by changing the rules of the game. We make billion dollar companies pay their fair share of taxes so that we can expand Medicare to include dental care. In 2012, the Greens were able to secure dental care for kids into Medicare. In this term of parliament, we conducted the first Senate inquiry into access to dental care in Australia. In addition to expanding Medicare to include dental care, the Greens are calling on the government to create a chief oral and dental health care officer within the department of health, because having healthy teeth should not be a luxury in this country. Everyone should be able to use their Medicare card to go to the dentist when they need it. We have no other choice but to bring dental care fully into Medicare.
Climate Change | Matters of Public Importance | House debates
The science is clear. Climate pollution from gas, oil and coal is driving more intense and more frequent weather and disasters. We're already experiencing horrible summers of deadly bushfires,...
The science is clear. Climate pollution from gas, oil and coal is driving more intense and more frequent weather and disasters. We're already experiencing horrible summers of deadly bushfires, flooding and immense heat and humidity. According to reports earlier this month, it's possible that this year we have already passed 1.5 degrees Celsius of human-caused warming; 1.5 degrees was meant to be the limit, and now we have sailed past it. We're in the midst of a climate crisis right now, and we must act urgently. The planet has a very specific and tight deadline for us. We cannot negotiate with that. Research published this year indicates that Australia was the third-largest exporter of primary fossil fuels behind only Russia and the USA. When we translate this into exported emissions, Australia comes second because of the sheer size of our coal exports. From 1961 to 2023, Australia's fossil fuel exports have been responsible for emitting 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. All this pollution—and for what? It all gets dug up and exported, with fossil fuel giants pocketing huge profits and everyday Australians left to bear the consequences. Successive Labor and coalition governments have failed to adequately tax fossil fuel companies, and the profits of those mining booms have gone offshore. At least countries like Norway have the decency to properly tax their resources sector so citizens have something to show for it. What Australians see in return for our fossil fuel exports are increasingly severe bushfires, floods and heatwaves. We're seeing insurance costs soar, with more and more homes becoming uninsurable altogether. Collectively, Australians are paying $20 billion more today on insurance than we were only 10 years ago. Government action and inaction have shifted the cost and burden of the climate disaster off fossil fuel companies and directly onto people and communities. Since coming to office, this Labor government has approved 28 new coal and gas projects. This government is also seeking to expand fossil fuels past 2050 as part of their Future Gas Strategy. This strategy will see gas exports soar, exporting billions of tonnes of emissions, which is inconsistent with achieving net zero and completely inconsistent with the science. Emissions would need to decline at an average of 14.5 million tonnes a year to meet Labor's 2030 target, and the steepest cuts would need to occur right now. But, instead, the data shows us that emissions reductions have stalled since Labor came to office. Approving renewable power generation is great, but we cannot put the fire out while we pour more petrol on it. We need to tackle climate change from all angles, and that means stopping new fossil fuel approvals. Forty per cent of our power grid is already renewables, so we don't need new coal and gas. The public wants stronger action on climate change. Each day we wait is another opportunity for the government to approve more and more fossil fuel projects. Our climate and our wildlife cannot afford further delay. Then, of course, we have the coalition, who may or may not even believe climate change is real. It's still a TBD. They've proposed concepts of a plan for nuclear reactors that would take 15 to 25 years to implement. The reality is our coal-fired power stations are going to close, and we are going to need to implement alternatives much sooner than 15 to 25 years from now. We cannot wait until the last minute. We should be working to the planet's timeline, not to the timeline and profits of fossil fuel companies. Australia is one of the sunniest and windiest countries on earth. Like I said, around 40 per cent of our national energy already comes from renewables. It's the lowest-cost and quickest way of building new energy, and it is the obvious choice. As we head into the federal election, it is not 'mission accomplished' on climate. Emissions are not going down; they have stalled. Fossil fuel projects are still being approved, and the fossil fuel industry is still being subsidised to the tune of billions of dollars every year. 'Mission accomplished' looks like a decarbonised economy, 100 per cent publicly owned renewable power, greater protections for our environment and biodiversity, and no new fossil fuels, for a start. We owe it to ourselves to be bold, to follow the science and to make sure Australia is not left behind, at the back of the pack, in a decarbonised world. I don't want us to be sitting here in 10 years wishing we had done more when we had the chance. The time is now. We have to do more now.
Health Legislation Amendment (Modernising My Health Record - Sharing by Default) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
The Greens will be supporting the Health Legislation Amendment (Modernising My Health Record—Sharing by Default) Bill 2024 in the House of Representatives and reserving our position in the...
The Greens will be supporting the Health Legislation Amendment (Modernising My Health Record—Sharing by Default) Bill 2024 in the House of Representatives and reserving our position in the Senate. We are in support of effective care pathways to promote greater cooperation and coordination between health services and systems. Furthermore, the Greens believe that health information and data linked to identifiable individuals should be stored with the best up-to-date security systems and protocols. There have been considerations raised by advocacy groups about the potential effects of this bill on healthcare providers. There is a likelihood that not all practices that will be subject to this legislation currently have the technical capability for the relevant information sharing. Upgrading software systems can be a costly endeavour and could be a process that would delay compliance. The Greens want to hear from the impacted practitioners about the impact that this bill would have on them. Because of this, we would like to see an inquiry into this bill which will then inform opposition in the Senate. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:09
Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
Prohibition doesn't work. Prohibition is not how you make social media platforms safer or empower young Australians to navigate the online world in a safe way. The Online Safety Amendment (Social...
Prohibition doesn't work. Prohibition is not how you make social media platforms safer or empower young Australians to navigate the online world in a safe way. The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill is not going to resolve the root causes of online harm. It's simply not going to work. All of us want to see more accountability for social media platforms and greater transparency for users, but this bill provides neither. Let's not forget how rushed the process has been. The government allowed for a consultation period on the bill for 24 hours. The Senate hearing for the bill was only three hours, and young people were essentially locked out from having their voices heard because of this process. We absolutely need to protect young people online, especially against the targeting, harvesting and selling of their data. A blanket ban, though, is not the way to do it. The recent parliamentary inquiry into social media heard over and over that an age ban will not make social media safer for anyone. It's complicated to implement, and it will have unintended consequences for young people. Yet here we are again, with the government and the coalition teaming up, ignoring the evidence and ramming this bill through in the final sitting week of the year. Why won't it work? This bill inserts a new definition of 'age-restricted social media platforms' which effectively puts a blanket ban on all social media platforms. The government has indicated that some platforms will be exempt, but we don't have the detail before us that we need to properly scrutinise this legislation. Leaving exemptions to regulations puts a lot of trust in the follow-through, and I'm not confident that it's going to be done effectively. The government themselves acknowledge this is not a perfect system. The Prime Minister has said: We know some kids will find workarounds, but we're sending a message to social media companies to clean up their act. The reality is that many kids, not just some, will find a way to access these platforms anyway, and social media companies don't actually have to change anything about how they apply their algorithms as a result of this bill. The bill also doesn't prescribe how platforms will monitor and enforce an age ban. We expect this will require some sort of age assurance, not just for young people but for everyone. The government already announced funding for an age-assurance trial in the budget but has only just awarded the tender. Essentially, the trial on a fundamental aspect of this bill has not even started yet. The idea of sharing important data with these platforms whose profit model is built on selling data profiles to advertisers is a very popular idea among not just young people but across my entire community! Let's not pretend that young people aren't going to find a way to access these platforms. They are smart; they will figure it out. I actually think of a time when I was 13, and I would come home from school and spend too much time playing on my computer; I wouldn't finish my homework. My dad installed a timing program on my computer so it would switch off after an hour, and I couldn't play The Sims for too long. It took me 10 minutes to figure out how to get around that. The answer there was to work with me to do my homework, not just ban the game that I was using. A blanket ban on social media also runs the risk of driving young people into even less safe online spaces. When that happens, it becomes impossible to know what is going on and how to help those who need help when something goes wrong. Many young people can have positive online experiences as well. Young people get a lot of good information and valuable social networks and support from social media, especially isolated young people or young people from marginalised backgrounds who may rely on it for their social contact. Why punish young people for the inaction of publishers and tech companies? This ban will create an Australia that says young people can go to prison at the age of 10 but can't go on Instagram until they are 16. What should we be doing? Experts are actively calling for alternative solutions to address the root causes of the problems of online safety, regulating the platforms themselves. The government has committed to legislating a duty of care, but that is not part of this legislation. If the government can rush these laws through, why can't they implement the duty of care they promised or take measures that actually make platforms safer for everyone, like banning platforms from collecting, selling and exploiting young peoples' data? The EU has the Digital Services Act which has a number of protections for young people, including banning the use of profiling for ads on children and implementing obligations for children's safety that providers must abide by. There are practical solutions here that we should be looking at, such as a ban of the targeting, harvesting and selling of young peoples' data, a digital duty of care platform, EU-style guardrails to limit the toxicity of algorithms and extreme content, the ability for users to turn down and opt out of unwanted content, the full release of the online safety act review and investment in education for young people and their families to help develop digital literacy and online safety skills and equip them with the tools and resources they need for positive and responsible online use. These actions would help tackle the root issues of social media. This is what we should be doing, not legislating a ban on access with the apparent expectation that everything is magically okay online the second you turn 16. An age ban alone will not make the platforms safer or age appropriate, nor will it change the culture that informs unsafe behaviours that people are targeted with on these platforms. Instead of banning young people altogether, we need to tackle the predatory business models of the tech giants. That includes the algorithms that fuel extremism and mental health issues. The government's own online safety expert, the eSafety Commissioner, has recommended a multipronged approach that encourages platforms to be safe by design. Australia's Human Rights Commissioner has voiced concerns about these restrictions in the legislation and the rushed time frame of this legislation as well. If the government wants to protect the safety of young people, they should be looking to stop platforms harvesting young peoples' data and targeting them with algorithms and advertising to make massive profits. All users should have the ability to switch off, reset or turn down the algorithms that push unwanted content into their feed. Privacy reforms are long overdue. The protection of users' data is vital to keeping people safer on- and offline. There is growing concern about the unabated use of users' data by tech companies to train their AIs without consent, knowledge or compensation. In the EU, the likes of Meta have been forced to provide an opt-out option for users, at a minimum. Australia must force companies to do the same here, because prohibition doesn't work; it hasn't before, and it won't now or into the future. If we are serious about addressing the issues that have arisen because of social media, then we must tackle them at the source. Guardrails, digital duties of care, stopping the targeting and harvesting of young people's data—all of these are far better approaches than a blanket ban. Young people will find ways around a ban, and then what? We may create a situation where young people are driven into even worse online spaces, and that is something that nobody wants. As the youngest person in this chamber and one of very, very few people in this place who grew up with this technology and with social media, I can say that change is needed but this bill is not it. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the internet works and how young people engage with the internet. So my message to the government is this: bin this bill, talk to young people and come back. Young people are painfully aware of how algorithms work and how they impact them and their social circles. Listen to young people. Listen to the experts. You would come back with a much better bill.
Climate Change | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, why are climate emissions higher under your government than when Scott Morrison left office?
Sydney Airport Demand Management Amendment Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I second the amendment. Back in the seventies, the International Air Transport Association, the IATA, came up with an airline slot system to reduce airport congestion. The initial aim was to...
I second the amendment. Back in the seventies, the International Air Transport Association, the IATA, came up with an airline slot system to reduce airport congestion. The initial aim was to regulate and improve the air traffic flow during busy travel times at busy airports. Some airports in Australia fall into the category that this system regulates. It's supposed to be a 'use it or lose it' system, where airlines have to use their slots at least 80 per cent of the time, or they become available to other airlines. But over time we've seen airlines manipulate the system by slot hoarding. This is a practice whereby airlines schedule a flight and then cancel it closer to the date of departure. This makes it look like they're using their allocated slots so that they don't lose them. It's anticompetitive, keeps competition out and keeps fares higher. It's also incredibly frustrating for customers because they are having constant schedule changes and cancellations of their flights. We absolutely need to reform slot compliance and enforcement and make transparency mandatory. We cannot have a system whereby slots are hoarded by airlines and managed by airlines. It makes zero sense. But let's zoom out for a moment. There is so much more that needs to be done to fix the root issues of the aviation industry in Australia. It's a highly monopolised, highly concentrated market. The likes of Qantas and Virgin are after corporate profit while the interests of consumers, workers and communities take a back seat. During the previous government, the Liberals and Nationals gave $2.7 billion in taxpayer subsidies to Qantas, and, in exchange, what did Qantas do? They fired 10,000 workers. And the High Court found that 1,700 of those workers were fired illegally. We fast forward to the 2022-23 financial year, and Qantas recorded a record profit of $2.47 billion. They paid no income tax, and of course they've made no mention of repaying any of the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies that the coalition handed out to them. If we are going to hand over that volume of money to private companies, the very least we should get in return is a stake in them. The Sydney Airport Demand Management Amendment Bill 2024 makes changes to the slot regime at Sydney airport to ensure viability of operations. It also works alongside the Sydney Airport Demand Management Act, which opposes a curfew between 11 pm and 6 am, as well as hourly caps on aircraft movements. It's not a perfect set-up, but inner Sydney will remain protected, by the curfew and these caps, from the worst of flight noise. Excessive noise pollution has serious health impacts, so much so that an independent health assessment into the third runway at Melbourne's Tullamarine airport showed potential six-month developmental delays in children due to excessive aircraft noise. This bill once again raises the question: why is such a scheme good enough for the Prime Minister's electorate, in Sydney, but not good enough for our community in Brisbane or for Melbourne or for Western Sydney? I've met with countless constituents that are seriously impacted by flight noise, especially with the long-haul heavy flights that land and take off at Brisbane in the middle of the night. I encourage the Labor government to vote with the Greens to pass our amendment to ensure that our Brisbane community have the same protections that are afforded to communities in Sydney.
Parliamentary Representation | Statements by Members | House debates
If the last decade of politics has shown us anything, it's that the two-party system is going to hold Australia back the longer we let it exist. We see system change and structural reform being...
If the last decade of politics has shown us anything, it's that the two-party system is going to hold Australia back the longer we let it exist. We see system change and structural reform being passed aside for quick bandaid fixes, and Labor-LNP unity tickets on reforms to cement their power. The fear of rocking the boat too much has well and truly ingrained itself in this place. The word I hear from my community about this incumbent Labor government is 'disappointing'. After almost a decade of LNP government, people expected big, positive and progressive changes, and what we got instead was business as usual. But when you look across at the opposition, the LNP have blatantly learned nothing from the 2022 federal election. The LNP have dug their heels in and, instead of accepting climate change is a real thing, have denied the benefits of renewable energy and presented policies that exist solely to extend the life or fossil fuels as long as possible. The last decade and this term of parliament has made it abundantly clear that if we want real action on climate change and environmental protection, and if we want an economy and society that puts people before profit, then the political system is going to have to change. The two-party system has shown itself to be fundamentally incapable of delivering the positive change people want to see. The only way we are getting a progressive system change in Australian is with a bigger crossbench, more Greens and a minority government.
Universities | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. Students and young people are saddled with billions of dollars of student debt. These debts can be in the tens of thousands, if not the hundreds of...
My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. Students and young people are saddled with billions of dollars of student debt. These debts can be in the tens of thousands, if not the hundreds of thousands, of dollars, making it harder for people to get their first home and to make ends meet. If the government can introduce its bill for free TAFE this week, why can't a bill to wipe 20 per cent of student debt be introduced this week as well? Why should young people and students be forced to wait to see the outcome of an election, when the government could work with the Greens to get this done now?
Health Care | Private Members' Business | House debates
I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) bulk-billing options are plummeting across the country and millions of people are delaying health care due to cost concerns; (b) the cost of living...
I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) bulk-billing options are plummeting across the country and millions of people are delaying health care due to cost concerns; (b) the cost of living crisis is both making mental health worse and causing an increasing number of people across Australia to delay or miss out on essential mental health care; (c) over 60 per cent of Australians have delayed dental care in the last year, and the most common reason for doing so was cost; and (d) everyone deserves to have access to good quality health care, including dental and mental health care, regardless of where you live, how old you are, or your bank balance; and (2) calls on the Government to commit to universal health care and make the big corporations pay their fair share of tax so as to fund: (a) bringing dental health into Medicare and expanding access to dental care to all; (b) unlimited mental health care under Medicare; and (c) a tripling of the bulk-billing incentive and the establishment of at least six free local health care clinics in each electorate to enable all Australians to go to the GP for free. Back in 2013, I was living in the United States in Florida, working for a little company called Disney. I had an experience there that really set me up for getting into politics for the rest of my life. I'd never really been that interested in politics growing up. I'm not from a political family per se. But one day I walked into the stockroom at where I was working and one of my co-workers was on the floor in literal tears. Obviously, as any normal person would do, I went up to her and asked: 'What's wrong? What's happened?' She was having to make the decision about whether she paid her rent or paid for her insulin. I remember in that moment thinking: 'I don't understand how this has happened. I don't understand how we can be working for this giant billion- or trillion-dollar company, getting paid $7 an hour, and you've been put in this position where you have to decide between fundamental health care or fundamental housing.' It's an impossible decision. We were able to rally around and raise some money for her, but I kept thinking that that was only going to help her for one month. It wasn't actually going to change the system that we were living in, where she had been put into that position. We hear all these horror stories that come out of the United States about their healthcare system, and we just cannot go down that same path. Having lived it and having seen people that have lived it and been at the brutal end of that system—we cannot do that. We have to turn the ship around now before we head down that path, because universal health care is vital to Australia. Everyone deserves to have access to quality health care, including dental care and mental health care, regardless of where you live, how old you are or whatever your bank balance may be. A properly funded universal healthcare system actually saves us money in the long run. It reduces poverty, creates jobs, drives economic growth and helps to alleviate inequality. But our healthcare system, as it stands, is starting to falter. At the same time, nearly one in three large corporations operating in Australia pay no income tax. Large corporations are able to use various offsets to be able to pay no tax while everyday Australians can't afford to go to the doctor. The system is fundamentally broken, and we are all living it. Bulk-billing options are plummeting around the country. Most people with a Medicare card are unable to find a bulk-billing appointment like they used to. In my electorate of Brisbane, only a few per cent of clinics still offer bulk-billing at all, and, what's more is that finding bulk-billing appointments outside of general working hours has become almost impossible. What this means is people skipping regular health appointments, prioritising their kids' health over their own, not following up on test results or avoiding care altogether because going to the doctor has become too expensive. People are waiting until issues become critical and then presenting to emergency rooms. Those healthcare horror stories that we all judge the United States for are well on their way to becoming a reality here, so what we need to do is triple the bulk-billing incentive for everyone with a Medicare card and establish at least six free local healthcare clinics in each electorate to enable all Australians to go to the GP for free. According to a recent Black Dog Institute poll, the leading reason for Australians delaying or not seeking mental health care is the cost. Sadly, but unsurprisingly, young adults are being impacted the most. Sixty 60 per cent of those aged 18 to 24 reported that they couldn't afford to get the help they needed—more than across any other age group. In order to access mental healthcare sessions through Medicare, you need a mental healthcare plan through a GP. After the pandemic, these subsidised sessions were cut from 20 to 10 per year. That's just the subsidy; it rarely covers the full cost. Like GP visits, it has become incredibly difficult to access sessions without a gap payment. There are also extra hoops to jump through to access the final four sessions. For example, you need another GP referral, which is going to cost you more and more money. When it comes to mental health care in this country, for every person receiving treatment, at least one person is going without. We have to bring mental health care fully under Medicare. Finally, everyone should be able to go to the dentist when they need help. Millions of Austrians are putting off going to the dentist because they can't afford it. This doesn't just lead to worse teeth; a range of other health concerns also come from that. The first thing I did after being elected to this place was go back to the dentist to get some fillings done, because I couldn't afford them while I was working in my retail job. Because I had left it so long, fillings became root canals and became exponentially more expensive. You shouldn't have to become a politician just to be able to afford to get your teeth fixed. Having healthy teeth should not be a luxury. Everyone should be able to use their Medicare card to go to the dentist. We have to bring mental health care and dental care fully into Medicare.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.