Tom French (Moore, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I don't even know where to start after that. I must thank the member for Goldstein. I feel he walked into the wrong meeting. That meeting's down the docks on a Wednesday night, my friend. He's forgotten what we were actually here to speak about.

I rise to speak in support of Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026. Taken together, these bills give effect to the government's additional estimates for the 2025-26 financial year. They authorise the expenditure required to meet the costs that have emerged since the budget, reflect updated demand driven programs and ensure that the parliament, the Public Service and the essential national systems continue to function effectively and responsibly.

At their core, these bills perform a fundamental constitutional role. Under our system of responsible government, no money may be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund without the authority of the parliament. Appropriation bills are the means by which the parliament exercises that authority. They are not vehicles for policy intervention. They are instruments of democratic accountability, ensuring that decisions already taken by government are properly scrutinised and transparently funded. That distinction matters. These bills do not create new rights or obligations. They do not, of themselves, establish programs or impose duties. What they do provide is the legal authority for expenditure that supports Australians in real and tangible ways through health care, disability services, defence capability, climate resilience, housing supply and the proper functioning of our democratic institutions. That constitutional role is particularly important in the context of additional estimates. Additional estimates exist because budgets are forecasts, not crystal balls. They respond to changes in economic conditions, updated demand for essential services and decisions taken after the budget that nevertheless require parliamentary authority to proceed.

Importantly, these bills demonstrate the distinction between fiscal discipline and fiscal neglect. Discipline means making responsible decisions, clearly explaining them and funding them transparently. Neglect is failing to act when costs rise, needs change or circumstances deteriorate, and then pretending that inaction is a virtue. The measures contained in these bills reflect careful consideration by government as to where additional resources are required and why. They are accompanied by detailed portfolio statements that allow this House and the public to assess whether those resources are aligned with stated outcomes and priorities. For that reason, appropriation debates are not merely technical exercises; they are an opportunity for the parliament to test whether expenditure decisions are coherent, justified and consistent with the values we claim to uphold—fairness, security, opportunity and responsibility. These bills meet the test.

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026 seeks approval for approximately $9.2 billion in additional funding for the ordinary annual services of government. This funding reflects updated costs and demand pressures across a range of portfolios. A significant portion of this funding is directed to the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. As a member of the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water, and as a former electrician, I have seen firsthand the importance of ensuring that funding in this portfolio is targeted, accountable and responsive to real-world pressures. Continued investment in programs such as cheaper home batteries and emissions reduction measures is not abstract climate policy; it is about lowering household energy costs, strengthening grid resilience and supporting Australia's transition to a cleaner and more secure energy system. In my electorate of Moore, that transition is already underway. As of 8 February 2026, 1,792 household batteries have been installed across the electorate. Families investing in storage to manage their power bills increases resilience during peak demand and contributes to a more reliable grid.

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026 also provides $1.5 billion to the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing. This includes substantial funding for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, ensuring participants continue to receive reasonable and necessary support. It also supports reforms to strengthen Medicare, protect access to medicines and improve the coordination and delivery of health services across Australia. As a kidney transplant recipient, I am acutely aware of the importance of a strong, accessible health system, including reliable access to essential medicines. Supporting the NDIS through additional estimates is not a failure of planning; it is an acknowledgement of reality. As the participant numbers grow and supports evolve, funding must keep pace. Anything less would undermine the confidence of participants and their families, and erode the trust that underpins the scheme itself.

In my electorate of Moore, these pressures are not abstract. My office serves families navigating the NDIS, older Australians managing chronic conditions and health professionals working under sustained strain. That includes constituents relying upon the Joondalup Health Campus for complex and acute care as well as follow-up treatment and ongoing medication in the community, underscoring the importance of stable funding arrangements across the health system. For them, the difference between timely funding and delayed funding is the difference between certainty and anxiety, between continuity of care and disruption. In suburbs across Moore, from Joondalup to Gwelup, these pressures are felt not in isolation but across households, workplaces and care networks.

These bills provide the legal authority and funding frameworks that support continuity in essential services. They help reduce the risk of services that Australians rely on being left vulnerable to administrative gaps or funding shortfalls simply because demand has increased since the budget. That is what responsible government looks like, including in such areas as defence and national security.

In defence, additional funding supports the implementation of the 2024 National defence strategy and the Defence Integrated Investment Program. In an increasingly uncertain strategic environment, maintaining credible defence capability is not optional. It is a core responsibility of government and is one that requires sustained, disciplined investment. Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026 also supports funding for the Department of Home Affairs, including resources to respond to security threats and maintain Australia's cohesive and multicultural society. This is about protecting Australians while upholding the values that define us as an open, democratic nation governed by the rule of law. The defence investments supported by these bills align with the government's stated strategic priorities and with the need to ensure that capability acquisition and sustainment can proceed as planned. Delays in funding often translate directly into delays in delivery—with long-term consequences for workforce planning, industry confidence and national readiness. Likewise, funding for Home Affairs reflects the reality that security challenges do not operate on a fixed calendar. Whether responding to emergency threats, maintaining border integrity or supporting social cohesion, government must retain the capacity to act decisively and lawfully.

Recent events, including the tragic attack at Bondi and the terrorist incident in Perth, are stark reminders that security threats can emerge suddenly and can have devastating impacts. They reinforce why agencies must have the resources and flexibility to respond swiftly, professionally and within the rule of law. Importantly, none of these measures exist in isolation from oversight. Expenditure is subject to audit, scrutiny through estimates and ongoing parliamentary review. Appropriations authorise spending; they do not remove accountability for how that spending is carried out. This parliament must always guard the balance between responsiveness and restraint carefully. These bills strike the appropriate balance. Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-26 complements this by authorising approximately $3.5 billion for services that are not classified as ordinary annual services of government. Constitutional requirements demand that these expenditures be dealt with separately, but their purpose is no less important.

This bill includes further funding for defence capability delivery, for environmental water purchases under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan and for housing initiatives initiated through Housing Australia. In particular, the provision of loans to support social and affordable housing projects recognises that housing supply constraints are a national challenge that demand coordinated, sustained action. For communities like my electorate of Moore, these investments are not theoretical. Housing affordability pressures are felt acutely by young families, key workers and older Australians seeking to downsize. Federal support for social and affordable housing, when combined with state and local action, helps ensure that growth does not come at the expense of fairness or opportunity. For communities like Moore, access to stable housing supports workforce participation by enabling people to live closer to their jobs, care networks and essential services. That local experience underscores why infrastructure, housing and environmental investments funded through these bills demonstrate the interconnected nature of modern policy challenges.

Housing supply, environmental sustainability and economic participation cannot be addressed in isolation from one another. Support for affordable and social housing through Housing Australia is a practical intervention that complements state and local efforts. It recognises that market forces alone will not meet the full range of housing needs—particularly for vulnerable Australians and essential workers. Environmental investments include water recovery and reflect the long-term responsibility governments bear to manage shared natural resources. These decisions require patience, consistency and funding certainty across multiple financial years. Appropriation Bill (No. 4) ensures that the commitments already made in these areas are properly resourced rather than left to be exposed to delay or dilution.

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-26, while modest in dollar terms, is equally essential. It provides additional funding to the Department of the House of Representatives and the Department of Parliamentary Services to support the operations of this parliament for the remainder of the financial year. This funding underpins the practical work that allows members to represent their constituents, committees to conduct inquiries and the parliament to function securely and effectively. In an era where democratic institutions face increasing global pressure, properly resourcing the parliament is not an indulgence; it is a safeguard. Across all three bills, there is consistent emphasis on accountability. The appropriations are supported by the portfolio budget statements and portfolio additional estimates statements, which provide detailed information on how funds are allocated and the outcomes they are intended to support. These documents form part of the interpretive framework of the legislation and are essential tools for parliamentary scrutiny.

It is also important to note that these bills replenish the advances to the finance minister and the presiding officers, ensuring that the government retains the capacity to respond to urgent and unforeseen circumstances. This mechanism is not a blank cheque; it is tightly constrained by law and subject to reporting requirements. It is a necessary feature of responsible fiscal management in a complex and dynamic environment.

For the people of Moore, the measures supported by these bills have real impacts. These bills reflect their government responding to changing circumstances with discipline rather than delay, with transparency rather than improvisation. They recognise that good fiscal management is not about refusing to act but about ensuring that the parliament authorises that action openly, transparently and in line with national priorities. I acknowledge that the appropriation debates are rarely glamorous. They lack the rhetorical flourish of major policy announcements, but they are among the most important debate this House conducts. They are where theory meets practice and where parliament discharges its most basic constitutional responsibility.

Finally, I want to address the broader context in which these bills are considered. Australians rightly expect governments to manage public money carefully. They also expect honesty about why spending is required and what it is intended to achieve. These bills do not pretend that challenges can be solved without cost, nor do they attempt to obscure expenditure behind vague authorisations or opaque mechanisms. They set out, clearly and transparently, the amounts required and the purpose for which they may be spent. That clarity strengthens trust in public institutions. It allows the House to do its job, and it allows Australians to judge whether the government is acting in their best interests. On that measure, these bills deserve support. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context