What happened to the member for Indi, Dr Helen Haines, has profoundly shaken this parliament and the nation. One of our colleagues was horrifically attacked and injured outside her electorate office. There's something terribly inadequate about the language available to us at moments such as this. We speak of solidarity, of hope and of recovery, and those words can seem insufficient beside the enormity of what has happened to Helen. Inadequate as they might feel, she deserves to hear them, and I want her to know that they are offered with the same care she has always shown to me, her community and so many others.

Perhaps the clearest thing I can say is that I am heartbroken. We do not know what motivated the alleged attack on Helen. However, much has been said about the wider unprecedented climate of hostility—one we all know is real. Some weeks back I delivered a speech in this place about the debilitating consequences of hate that plagues Australia and those who encourage it. It is that point I want to briefly revisit. Online platforms dominate public debate and dangerously reward the prolific distribution and amplification of hate, division and hostility. That is not a contested idea. Platforms record this activity as engagement and reward it with further circulation, with little to no accountability. We've been willing to treat these platforms as neutral and accept that it is just the technology at work. However, the systems that determine what we read, see and hear, and what is promoted and repeated, are based on deliberate commercial decisions. When the widespread circulation of hostility becomes commercially rewarding, we face a troubling imbalance: the financial benefits and rewards accrue to those who distribute it, while the consequences are borne by the communities who must live with it.

The other point to make is that hatred expressed online does not necessarily stay there. Platforms that circulate hatred can join up people who hate, and can influence and deepen their grievances. In some circumstances, the hatred which is spread spills into the community with acts of violence. Many members of parliament have spoken publicly about the volume of online threats they receive, including threats of sexual violence, violence and death. Many of my female colleagues have had to endure extraordinary levels of abhorrent abuse, much of it directed at them because they are women. These are not simply insults to be endured as the price of public life; they change the way elected representatives do their work—where they go, who they meet with and, for some, whether to uproot their families because of safety concerns.

In Australia, our representatives live among the people they serve. They shop in the same places and send their children to the same schools. People can walk up to their elected representatives, when they meet on the street, and talk with them. It is vital that this continues. That closeness is part of what makes Australian democracy work. We are not like other countries. Violence against people in public life is not something this nation has ever accepted. It has no place in this country.

I want Helen, Phil and their family to know that they have the affection and support of people right across the nation. I also want Helen's electorate office team to know that they have the care and support of people across the nation, and that my team and I offer unconditional help, if needed. I wish Helen a speedy recovery and I look forward to seeing her sitting in this chamber with us again.