Kylea Tink's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
type: channel
language: en-gb
creator: OpenAustralia.org, mprss.php script
date: 2025-09-07T23:05:16+00:00
items: Climate Change | Adjournment | House debates
items: North Sydney Electorate | Statements by Members | House debates
items: Human Rights Joint Committee; Report | Committees | House debates
items: Biodiversity | Matters of Public Importance | House debates
items: New Vehicle Efficiency Standard | Questions without Notice | House debates
items: Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Valedictory | Parliamentary Representation | House debates
items: Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Life Insurance | Questions without Notice | House debates
items: Infrastructure | Statements by Members | House debates
items: g29.2
items: Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024; Third Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Pensions and Benefits | Statements by Members | House debates
items: Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Treasury Laws Amendment (Mergers and Acquisitions Reform) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
items: Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates

Climate Change | Adjournment | House debates
type: item
description: When I gave my first speech in this place almost three years ago, I said that the people of North Sydney wanted faster action on climate change, led by facts, not politics. They recognised we're...
encoded: When I gave my first speech in this place almost three years ago, I said that the people of North Sydney wanted faster action on climate change, led by facts, not politics. They recognised we're at a tipping point on climate and, fundamentally, politics. Like many other forward-looking communities across Australia, they wanted a clear and actionable plan to reduce national emissions. They wanted innovative, smart and transparent investment in renewable energy, and they wanted improved access to clean transport. When I stood here then, I committed to advocate for science informed action on climate change and faster access to cleaner fuels and more efficient vehicles, and I committed to work together across all levels of government to make the electorate of North Sydney one of the first net zero urban energy zones in the country. Fast forward to today, and I can proudly say that North Sydney has delivered. From legislative amendments to private member's bills, community forums and clean energy fairs, the electorate of North Sydney has moved towards net zero as a community and pushed this 47th Parliament to take bold, decisive steps to tackle climate change. When the Climate Change Bill 2022 was introduced to legislate the government's 43 per cent emissions reduction target, North Sydney was there, ensuring advice from the Climate Change Authority would be published on its website and tabled in parliament. We supported other crossbench amendments to strengthen the bill, including supporting regional communities and ensuring the 43 per cent emissions reduction target was a floor, not a ceiling. We successfully amended the safeguard mechanism to prevent new or expanded fossil fuel projects from accessing government funding to pursue abatement, and we worked with the government to ensure carbon offsets are not recognised within the Future Made in Australia Guarantee of Origin scheme. We fought for changes to the nature-positive bills to ensure better transparency and comm…
date: 2025-02-13T11:00:00+00:00

North Sydney Electorate | Statements by Members | House debates
type: item
description: In 2022, the North Sydney community sent me to parliament to be their authentic voice, rather than a distorted version filtered through a party caucus room. As the last federal member for North...
encoded: In 2022, the North Sydney community sent me to parliament to be their authentic voice, rather than a distorted version filtered through a party caucus room. As the last federal member for North Sydney, I wanted to record how that voice and vote has been used. I've served on three parliamentary joint committees—the human rights committee, the Parliamentary Library committee and the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards—and have fearlessly applied our community's values to those deliberations. I've introduced three private member's bills: the first on cleaner vehicles, the second to end indefinite detention of asylum seekers and children, and one to legislate a rights based approach to housing. On the 326 bills passed I have spoken 143 times, and moved 82 amendments to 19 different bills to influence climate, industrial relations, tax, superannuation and integrity reforms. I've made over 240 statements, including on ministerial questions and constituent statements. I've attended 90 per cent of divisions, voting with the ALP 49 per cent of the time, to support human rights, HECS, fuel efficiency standards and net zero economy reform, and with the coalition 55 per cent of the time, to support small business, industrial relations and superannuation reform. I voted with the Greens 61 per cent of the time, to support climate policy and environmental reform. I've also consistently supported crossbench colleagues on integrity and accountability, women's safety, climate change mitigation and adaptation and environmental reform. Contrasting this to party backbenchers, I've done three times the work. I'd say North Sydney's voice has been well and truly heard.
date: 2025-02-13T13:39:00+00:00

Human Rights Joint Committee; Report | Committees | House debates
type: item
description: by leave—I rise to speak to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights report on the inquiry into antisemitism at Australian universities. I want to start by thanking the chair of...
encoded: by leave—I rise to speak to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights report on the inquiry into antisemitism at Australian universities. I want to start by thanking the chair of the committee, the member for Macnamara, because I think he did an excellent job in holding us all together and holding space for this really important inquiry. I also want to thank all my fellow committee members for their engagement with and participation in the inquiry and extend my heartfelt thanks to all of those who supplied evidence. The testimony of many witnesses was immensely powerful, and the sincerity and frankness they brought to the discussion was invaluable. I'd like to particularly thank the Jewish community, who spoke so eloquently and honestly about their experiences and fears, and, again, reiterate my deep concern and care for them. The testimony of the Australasian Union of Jewish Students in particular stayed with me throughout the hearings—thank you for your courage. As a member of the 47th parliament, I feel the incredible weight that comes with participating in an inquiry like this one. To think our society has reached a point where we needed to hold this inquiry is a sad indictment on the direction we are headed in indeed. As a person the community from North Sydney sent to parliament to represent them during this term, hear me when I say that the people who surround me every day in my community share a common belief that all of us have the right to feel safe, be treated with respect and participate in our society without fear of vilification or discrimination based on our individual characteristics. We condemn all forms of racism and are horrified at the recent antisemitic attacks that we've witnessed across our country. We must do better. To this moment then, while I support the majority of the committee's recommendations and the report as a whole, I do have some concerns with particular recommendations, which I'd like to address. Firstly, while I certainl…
date: 2025-02-12T16:24:00+00:00

Biodiversity | Matters of Public Importance | House debates
type: item
description: As the State of the environment report declared in 2021 nature is in crisis with the general outlook for our environment deteriorating. It showed Australia has one of the highest rates of species...
encoded: As the State of the environment report declared in 2021 nature is in crisis with the general outlook for our environment deteriorating. It showed Australia has one of the highest rates of species decline in the developed world, with more mammal species lost here than anywhere else, and we are the only developed country that is a deforestation hotspot. Yet four years on from that report, logging of native forests is still exempt from federal biodiversity approval processes in some parts of Australia, and hectares of threatened species habitat is routinely destroyed by both approved and unauthorised clearing. And while our legislation does not recognise it, climate change is absolutely compounding the damage from deforestation, invasive species, pollution and urban expansion with species from Australia and New Zealand among the most at risk of extinction globally. As the 47th Parliament enters its final days, it's little wonder that greater protection for nature is the call I hear most consistently from my community of North Sydney. Indeed, my office is frequently inundated by people across my electorate asking me and this parliament to do more to protect nature. Meanwhile the sentiment is amplified when you look at the results of recent polls, with the Biodiversity Council poll showing nearly nine in 10 Australians support stronger national nature laws while two in three people support the establishment of national environmental standards. This is further supported by the results of a YouGov poll that showed seven out of 10 voters want the government to do more to protect and restore nature. Fascinatingly, these sentiments are reflected consistently regardless of age and political allegiance. Yet, after almost three years of discussion, development and debate, this parliament has failed to deliver on any of the ambitions, leaving our communities, rightfully, bitterly frustrated—frustrated at the government, frustrated by the opposition and frustrated by this parliame…
date: 2025-02-12T15:13:00+00:00

New Vehicle Efficiency Standard | Questions without Notice | House debates
type: item
description: My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. For too long, Australians were placed at the bottom of the list in terms of priority access to low-emissions vehicles, and, without...
encoded: My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. For too long, Australians were placed at the bottom of the list in terms of priority access to low-emissions vehicles, and, without intervention, transport will be the largest source of emissions in Australia by 2030. The people of North Sydney, who are surrounded by major freeways and roads, are living with the consequences of that in terms of poor air quality. We fought for and welcomed the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard that has come into effect this year. But, with misinformation regarding the impacts of these standards rife, could you please provide an update on them, including their expected impact on both the uptake and the price of vehicles?
date: 2025-02-12T15:04:00+00:00

Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: In October last year, I hosted the North Sydney Deliberative Democracy Forum on early childhood education and care. The event brought together 35 randomly selected but demographically...
encoded: In October last year, I hosted the North Sydney Deliberative Democracy Forum on early childhood education and care. The event brought together 35 randomly selected but demographically representative members of our community, with experts from academia and industry, to discuss the affordability and accessibility of early childhood education and care services right across our country. Their goal was to arrive at a consensus on a policy approach that they wanted to see the federal government pursue to ensure these services are affordable and accessible to everyone. There were lots of ideas that participants supported, including equalising the pay of early childhood educators with primary-school educators and requirements to build early childhood education and care centres alongside new public primary schools. But the core of their final recommendation was that the government should provide universal free or low-cost early childhood education and care services to all children from birth, regardless of their families' financial circumstances. I can't tell you how pleased I am, then, to say that, with the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025, the government is moving Australia towards my community's final recommendations and aspirations, and we could not be more pleased with this reform. I want to thank everyone who has fought so hard for it over many years. Indeed, when I first announced that I'd run as the independent candidate for North Sydney, it was people who were advocating in this area who were among the first to approach me to ask for my support, and, as a consequence, it was one of our key policy platforms during that campaign. This win, then, is not just for parents but specifically for all children right across the country. That's because this bill does two really important things. Firstly, it winds back the activity test to ensure that all families have access to 72 hours of subsidised care a fortnight, regardless of how many hou…
date: 2025-02-12T11:35:00+00:00

Valedictory | Parliamentary Representation | House debates
type: item
description: Standing to give a valedictory speech after just three years as the Independent federal member for North Sydney is nothing short of surreal. No-one—well, except maybe Antony...
encoded: Standing to give a valedictory speech after just three years as the Independent federal member for North Sydney is nothing short of surreal. No-one—well, except maybe Antony Green—could have predicted this plot twist, especially given that, when as a community we decided to take our voice and our vote back in 2022, we had plans that reached well beyond one parliamentary term. At the time we were deeply dissatisfied with what we saw as a lack of direction or ambition offered by either of the major parties. Regardless of what our MP said to our faces in our electorate, when they came here they would always cast North Sydney's vote the way the party instructed them to. The blue tie/red tie dynamic was too focused on working for itself rather than for us. When we wanted faster action on climate change, we were witnessing prevarication and outright denial. We were literally told we were overreacting and we needed to calm down. Where we expected integrity, transparency and accountability from those in parliament, we were instead offered $10 million in regional sporting grants to fix our iconic—and not-so-regional—North Sydney Olympic Pool. It seemed the expectations for appropriate conduct set by us ordinary folks were too pedestrian, and we were told that if we had a problem with that we could take it up at the next election. Where we wanted to see a society where everyone could reach their full potential regardless of gender, racial, cultural, sexual or religious background, we were offered a government hell-bent on advocating for women only when it was not 'at the expense of anyone else' and who openly castigated those who wanted true equity as 'woke'. So, after 115 years as a safe Liberal seat, we did the unthinkable and turned up en masse to take our parliamentary voice and vote back, rather than simply handing it over yet again to an unresponsive and disrespectful party system. As one of the first seats ever established in Australia, North Sydney has a long history …
date: 2025-02-10T17:39:00+00:00

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: As I rise to speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024, I can't help but be struck by the thought that, yet again, here is another Frankensteinian monster of a...
encoded: As I rise to speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024, I can't help but be struck by the thought that, yet again, here is another Frankensteinian monster of a bill, one that combines changes to the way fuel-efficient vehicles are treated under the luxury car tax system, provisions that would make the penalties attached to general interest charges and shortfall interest charges non-tax-deductible, an extension of the ATO's notification period for retaining funds from 14 to 30 days and, finally, the long-promised extension of the instant asset write-off for small businesses, which is being moved as an amendment to this bill by the government. Again, there's no logic in this legislation. It couples some pretty ordinary reforms in a way that makes it hard to vote against them, as the overall potential upside probably outweighs the potential downside. But it's still ugly. Let me explain. If we start at the beginning, in principle, the changes to the luxury car tax are welcome, not the least because these are way overdue. Yet, the changes to the tax deductibility of the ATO penalties are problematic, as they're likely to be yet another measure that will disproportionately affect small businesses who are already struggling. Rather, the reform offered here does nothing to meaningfully assist small businesses to reduce their debts, but it will impact their cash flow. The ATO time extension is probably neither here nor there, although it does seem to prioritise the needs of an agency over all others, while the extension of the instant asset write-off is quite simply something that can't come soon enough and, potentially, hasn't gone far enough in this iteration. In this scenario, the question I have to answer as the member for North Sydney is, 'Which side of the median line does the needle finally land on?' Speaking firstly to the reform of the luxury car tax, schedule 1 of this bill redefines fuel-efficient vehicles as those with fuel con…
date: 2025-02-06T10:49:00+00:00

Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I confess that, as a member of the 47th Parliament, I can't help but feel the incredible weight that comes with debating what is quite an extraordinary piece of legislation in our nation's...
encoded: I confess that, as a member of the 47th Parliament, I can't help but feel the incredible weight that comes with debating what is quite an extraordinary piece of legislation in our nation's history. That our society has reached a point where we must put in place laws to protect individuals and groups from hate speech is a very sad indictment on the direction in which we are headed. Yet here we are. As the person the community of North Sydney sent to parliament to represent them during this term, I ask you to hear me when I say the people who surround me in my community every day share a common belief that all of us have the right to feel safe, to be treated with respect and to participate in our society without fear of vilification and discrimination based on our individual characteristics. If realising that ambition means we need to move laws like this, then we will support that legislation wholeheartedly. At the end of the day, however, we will also ensure our day-to-day actions are driven by common values that are not just practised to ensure we stay within the boundaries of the law but are practically lived on a daily basis to ensure everyone feels included. We will also continue to work to bring those that are currently outliers to this ambition back into line, even as we are called 'woke'. Much to all our shame, there are people currently living in Australia who are subject to hate speech and vilification. To quote the Human Rights Law Centre: Far right hate and extremism is on the rise. Women wearing the hijab have been assaulted by men in the street, while men wearing the kippah have been met with the white power salute. We have seen rallies held against trans rights, and neo-nazis intimidating refugee activists. This cannot continue. Most recently it has been heartbreaking to see so many disgusting instances of blatant antisemitism targeting Jewish businesses, individuals and places of worship. These acts are abhorrent, and there is absolutely no place for t…
date: 2025-02-05T10:40:00+00:00

Life Insurance | Questions without Notice | House debates
type: item
description: My question is to the Assistant Treasurer. You announced 6½ weeks ago that the government was committed to legislating a total ban on the use of predictive genetic tests when Australians are...
encoded: My question is to the Assistant Treasurer. You announced 6½ weeks ago that the government was committed to legislating a total ban on the use of predictive genetic tests when Australians are attempting to access life insurance products. Despite this promise, genetic discrimination legislation has not been introduced. Assistant Treasurer, when will the genetic discrimination legislation be introduced and what is causing the delay?
date: 2024-11-27T15:07:00+00:00

Infrastructure | Statements by Members | House debates
type: item
description: Stories of builds that run over budget and over time are plentiful, but the saga of the North Sydney Olympic Pool is a cracker. Last week, residents across North Sydney were dismayed when our...
encoded: Stories of builds that run over budget and over time are plentiful, but the saga of the North Sydney Olympic Pool is a cracker. Last week, residents across North Sydney were dismayed when our local council flagged that they may need to raise rates because of the bungling of what was meant to be the refit of the change rooms at our iconic pool. Back in 2020, the then North Sydney Council embarked on a project without final designs or proper costings. Then, in a brazen pre-election grab for votes, they were waylaid by a coalition government pledge of $10 million for the project. Four years on, the pool is still closed. Understandably, news of a possible rate hike has many worried, with one person recently asking me why she should pay for the previous council's gross mismanagement. All of us in this place must learn from runaway infrastructure projects like this and challenge pork-barrelling that runs rampant in the lead-up to elections, because pre-election promises can derail normal governance and sideline community interests. While our current mayor, Zoe Baker, is doing everything she can to rectify the issue, the challenge is significant. Just in the past week the member for Indi reintroduced the Accountability of Grants, Investment Mandates and Use of Public Resources Amendment (End Pork Barrelling) Bill 2024, a private member's bill designed to stop this egregious and cynical behaviour. While they're too late for North Sydney, her proposed reforms would safeguard other electorates. I urge the government to bring on the member's bill for debate as a member of urgency.
date: 2024-11-27T13:36:00+00:00

g29.2
type: item
title: Future Made in Australia (Guarantee of Origin) Bill 2024, Future Made in Australia (Guarantee of Origin Charges) Bill 2024, Future Made in Australia (Guarantee of Origin Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
description: Australia urgently needs to reduce emissions and transition to a zero carbon economy. My community of North Sydney have long realised that the net zero transition is not just an obligation but an...
encoded: Australia urgently needs to reduce emissions and transition to a zero carbon economy. My community of North Sydney have long realised that the net zero transition is not just an obligation but an opportunity to revitalise Australian industry, increase productivity and meaningfully improve the quality of life for all Australians. In that context, my community largely welcomes the Future Made in Australia policy package to attract invest investment in low-carbon technologies and projects in Australia and leverage the financial and industrial opportunities that arise from the global transition to net zero. The Guarantee of Origin scheme will underpin the Future Made in Australia package by establishing a critical carbon accounting framework on products made under the package. Specifically, the scheme will function as an internationally aligned, voluntary certification program for low-emissions products and renewable electricity. Certification will initially focus on renewable electricity—through the creation of renewable energy guarantee of origin certificates, or REGO certificates—and hydrogen and associated products through the product guarantee of origin certificates. There will be potential for a phased expansion to low-carbon liquid fuels and green metals. There's a real need for this. Within the Australian economy there is a lack of trusted, consistent information about low-emission Australian made products and no enduring mechanism to certify renewable electricity. I welcome the government's efforts to provide a legislative framework for a voluntary scheme to certify products such as hydrogen and renewable electricity. However, we must exercise a large degree of caution when implementing such a scheme. Product guarantee of origin certificates can be likened to a nutrition label that accumulates information, as the product moves through each stage of production, and signals healthier food choices to customers. In this case, these new certificates will indicate lo…
date: 2024-11-27T10:41:00+00:00

Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: This is exactly what many have been calling for. I therefore encourage the government to focus on the duty-of-care legislation rather than rushing this blunt bill, the Online Safety Amendment...
encoded: This is exactly what many have been calling for. I therefore encourage the government to focus on the duty-of-care legislation rather than rushing this blunt bill, the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024. After all, there is a positive precedent for a duty-of-care approach, with the EU's digital safety act obliging companies to design and operate their platforms to ensure people aren't harmed. Likewise, the United Kingdom legislation prevents access to content that promotes eating disorders or suicide. Here, I want to acknowledge the work of the member for Goldstein, who this week introduced her Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2024. In stark contrast to what we have in front of us, this alternative bill has been developed over a period of 18 months in consultation with experts, carers and young people. Importantly, the member for Goldstein's bill addresses the underlying issues relating to online harm. I therefore thank her for her work and urge the government to withdraw their bill and bring hers on for debate. To proceed with the legislation as it currently stands sets us up for failure, as evidenced by the failure of bans in other jurisdictions, including France and Canada. Concerningly, a ban has the potential to create a false sense of security for parents and complacency for platforms, leaving children who circumvent it with no protection against harmful content. Even if a ban could be enforced, there is a real risk it would drive young people to less-regulated services where adults or regulators have less oversight. The government has also indicated online gaming services would fall beyond the scope of this legislation, despite games displaying many of the features cited as the core problems with social media, such as addictive features and potentially harmful content on social feeds. I can't let that exclusion go unchallenged as I have personal experience with friends who have had their kids refuse to go to school…
date: 2024-11-26T17:02:00+00:00

Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024; Third Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: My understanding of the process of consideration in detail is that this is a stage of the legislation progressing through the House where I can ask questions of the minister about the intention...
encoded: My understanding of the process of consideration in detail is that this is a stage of the legislation progressing through the House where I can ask questions of the minister about the intention behind the bill, but I note that the minister is not currently in the chamber, so I'm just looking for direction on how that stage of consideration in detail may proceed.
date: 2024-11-26T16:46:00+00:00

Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: In the 2½ years I've been in this place I have learned good government policy is created collaboratively, while poor policy is developed 'for others' through a top-down approach that does...
encoded: In the 2½ years I've been in this place I have learned good government policy is created collaboratively, while poor policy is developed 'for others' through a top-down approach that does not involve those who stand to be most affected. Policy developed this way is frequently a recipe for disaster as unintended consequences swamp a good intention. I fear that's exactly what we are seeing in this Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024, a piece of legislation that may be well intentioned but ultimately fails to deliver on its promise. Rather than you taking my word for it, I want to share with you the words of one of my youth forum participants. He compared this ban to a mayor of a city who, in response to high rate of car crashes, decides to simply ban cars rather than fix the potholes, make seatbelt laws or provide more driver education. In his exact words, he said: While that probably sounds silly, to young people like me, the government's plan to ban social media for under 16's applies the same logic—it doesn't fix anything and fails to recognize the benefits of social media for my generation. With those words ringing in my ears, then, I stand today to put forward a contention that the policy that the government is moving appears to be more about quick political wins than doing something meaningful for our kids. They are not fixing the potholes; they are just telling our kids there won't be any cars. In pushing this legislation, the government has shown it's not prepared to listen to the voices of countless human rights groups and mental health experts who are concerned that a social media ban will not only be ineffective but will be harmful to many young people. They are also indicating that they do not care that this reform threatens to stop young people accessing much-needed mental health services and information and to isolate them from social community, all while driving them to less-regulated services. Perhaps even more galling, the leg…
date: 2024-11-26T13:22:00+00:00

Pensions and Benefits | Statements by Members | House debates
type: item
description: I want to draw the parliament's attention to the plight of one of my constituents—let's call him John. John is an 85-year-old pensioner who lives in North Sydney. He has passionately...
encoded: I want to draw the parliament's attention to the plight of one of my constituents—let's call him John. John is an 85-year-old pensioner who lives in North Sydney. He has passionately advocated about the impossible position he and many others find themselves in during their latter years, trying to survive on the age pension. John has done everything right. He's worked hard, paid his taxes, educated his kids and paid off the mortgage on a modest flat. Now he's a pensioner living independently in his own home. But while John is asset rich, his sole income on a single pension is just $500 a week. And just as John has asked me on many occasions, I now ask the parliament: how does someone live comfortably on that amount with limited to no potential to earn additional income? John has tried to find work to supplement his pension, but at the age of 85 the pickings are slim and, heartbreakingly, the experience of applying for jobs has been demoralising. He's been spoken to rudely and even hung up on. As he said, in his own words, 'I haven't been so insulted in my whole life.' In this context, I implore the government to reflect deeply on our social services framework, particularly the plight of pensioners who are being crushed by the rising cost of living. If recipients of Australian Commonwealth welfare are not safe from poverty then we have some serious soul searching to do.
date: 2024-11-25T00:00:00+00:00

Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I thank the honourable member for Barker for allowing me time to get to the chamber; it is very kind of you. I stand to oppose the Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention...
encoded: I thank the honourable member for Barker for allowing me time to get to the chamber; it is very kind of you. I stand to oppose the Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024, which gives the minister the power to declare an item a prohibited item, introduces sniffer dogs into detention facilities and creates Australian-made Guantanamo Bay-esque detention camps. From the outset, it is worth pointing out that this is not a new bill; rather, it is a rerun of the Morrison government's proposal to ban immigration detainees from accessing mobile phones, and is indicative of an appalling race to the bottom. This is the fourth time this bill has been produced since 2017, when the then immigration minister Peter Dutton introduced it on behalf of the coalition government. It was then reintroduced in 2019 and again in 2020 yet each time it has failed to pass the House due to a lack of support, including from the then opposition, the Labor Party. While many have feared that Labor has been inching closer to the coalition on immigration policy, the introduction of this legislation shows they are not even trying to hide that fact anymore, moving what is essentially a cut-and-paste of Peter Dutton's previously failed migration strategy. The bill amends the Migration Act to allow the minister to determine that an item is a prohibited thing in relation to immigration detention facilities or persons in detention. These broad and discretionary powers would allow the minister to determine any item, from a mobile phone to a SIM card to a stuffed toy, as a prohibit item if the minister was satisfied that it would pose a risk to the health, safety or security of a person in a facility or the order a facility. For example, there may come a day when the minister decides reading glasses should be prohibited, as this item could potentially be used to make some sort of weapon, even without proof there was ever an intention of the owner to do so. They m…
date: 2024-11-25T18:46:00+00:00

Treasury Laws Amendment (Mergers and Acquisitions Reform) Bill 2024; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: (): There's no doubt Australia is in a period of significant economic transition. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted many critical industries, both globally and domestically, and it will...
encoded: (): There's no doubt Australia is in a period of significant economic transition. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted many critical industries, both globally and domestically, and it will be some time before our economy fully recovers. Coming out the other side of the pandemic, we've entered an inflationary environment that puts immense pressure on consumers, businesses and governments. At the same time, we are embarking on a much-needed transition to a net zero economy. In this context, competition is more important than ever before. This transition will impact Australia's critical industries, consumers and small businesses in profound ways. New markets are on the horizon, and it is impossible to anticipate how they will emerge or develop. Competition can be a driving force for investment, dynamism and innovation. All are required to undertake this transition; therefore, it is critical we protect it by getting our competition policy reform right from the start. While most merger transactions do not harm competition and, indeed, provide many benefits, some can and do affect the competitive conditions of an industry. The growing trend of market concentration in Australia since the early 2000s is not one that we should continue to ignore. According to a 2023 report from e61 Institute, in seven per cent of Australian industries the top four firms had more than 80 per cent of the market share. I just want to repeat that. In seven per cent of Australian industries, the top four firms had more than 80 per cent market share. Compare this to countries like the United States, where only one per cent of the industries have a market concentration that high. Ultimately, however, my community and indeed most Australians don't need statistics to understand the problem. Whether it's electricity, health insurance or retail, the Australian economy is rife with examples of markets where a few big players dominate, and, as a consequence, consumers are arguably missing out while producers …
date: 2024-11-20T17:03:00+00:00

Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I rise again in support of the amendment moved by the member for Indi. I've just got to say how sensible the member for Indi and her team are in terms of how they approach not only this piece of...
encoded: I rise again in support of the amendment moved by the member for Indi. I've just got to say how sensible the member for Indi and her team are in terms of how they approach not only this piece of legislation but every piece of legislation that we see come into the House. There are very few members in this House that have a higher level of integrity than the member for Indi. When you hear the member for Indi suggest that the best way for a piece of legislation to be scrutinised is by an independent parliamentary committee, you can actually pretty much guarantee that she knows what she's talking about. This is a member that has been involved in developing bodies like the National Anti-Corruption Commission. This is a member who has argued, since she joined parliament, for increased levels of integrity in this place. But, for those who are at home wondering why you wouldn't just go to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, I want to explain the structure of parliamentary joint committees in this place. What usually happens in a parliamentary joint committee is that the party of the government of the day dominates the committee. They have the most numbers on the committee. In fact, every committee in this place, bar one—and that is actually the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Anti-Corruption Commission—will be chaired by a member of the government of the day, and the deputy chair will be from the opposition of the day. In the case of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, which is a great committee—I think we should have it; we should be very transparent around it—the truth of the matter is it was originally tasked with looking at the results of the 2022 election, an election which created the largest crossbench in the history of the Australian parliament, and that crossbench has the largest number of Independents in the history of the Australian parliament. Yet, interestingly, for those playing along at home, there wasn't an Indepen…
date: 2024-11-20T16:26:00+00:00

Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024; Consideration in Detail | Bills | House debates
type: item
description: I rise in support of the amendments just moved by the honourable member for Indi, because, when all is said and done, she has really hit the mark when it comes to the heart of what is the key...
encoded: I rise in support of the amendments just moved by the honourable member for Indi, because, when all is said and done, she has really hit the mark when it comes to the heart of what is the key issue here. People like myself have copped a lot of criticism in this parliament because of the amount that was spent to see the seat of North Sydney turned Independent. In part, that's because there is no doubt about how much money was spent in North Sydney. The seat is fully accounted for in terms of what was invested. We do not, even under the current system, have the same line of sight when it comes to the major parties. We do not know what the major parties spent to win Macnamara. We do not know what the major parties spent to win in Bradfield. All we know is the combined campaign spending. I actually find it pretty extraordinary that, when you go to look at the returns during the 2022 election year, there are members currently sitting in seats in this House that have a zero next to their name in terms of how much money was spent in their electorate during the 2022 election. How does that work? What we've seen in what the member for Indi has brought forward here is a complete acknowledgement. We're very happy to see expenditure caps introduced, as long as the expenditure caps are the same for everyone and that the transparency around that expenditure is the same for everyone. I thank the member for Indi for continuing this fight. She has very clearly articulated the upside of looking at this piece of legislation through what she's proposing. I would welcome the government seriously considering this amendment as a true show of faith that they are looking to create an equal playing field, not just embed a political duopoly.
date: 2024-11-20T16:17:00+00:00