Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is very hard to consider in detail the infrastructure budget, when there's so little to actually reflect on in the budget in terms of infrastructure. It was quite amazing to sit there and listen to the budget speech, when the Treasurer didn't actually mention the word 'infrastructure' once in his speech. I've been here for 15 years. I don't recall any Treasurer never actually mentioning the word 'infrastructure' in their budget speech. It's simply unheard of. I don't believe the Treasurer even mentioned the words 'roads' in his speech either, which is fascinating to me, coming from a rural and regional community, when roads and infrastructure are such critical issues in our communities.

I'm very concerned that this minister has hit the ground reviewing. It's 12 months after Labor winning the election, and her signature policies so far have been to announce a 90-day review of the Infrastructure Investment Program and at the same time to abolish one of the most successful programs in recent history, the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure program. I had the chance to speak today at the Australian Local Government Association conference here in Canberra, and the support for that program, the LRCI program, was quite staggering. What this minister has done, what this Albanese government has done, has been to deliberately strip local decision-making power, taking power off local governments and centralising it back in Canberra. They don't want local government. They don't trust local government to set their own local priorities. This minister has actually wasted her first year in office and has so little to show for it, and the Treasurer didn't even mention the word 'infrastructure' in the budget speech because they're embarrassed by their failure to deliver.

As I travel around my electorate, I get to see some very significant infrastructure projects happening right now. There's the Princes Highway duplication and the Gippsland rail line upgrades. Every major infrastructure project occurring right now in Gippsland is only occurring because the previous federal government funded it and got on with the job. There is not a single new project that has started in my electorate in the last 12 months that this federal government has had anything to do with, but this doesn't stop Labor ministers from rushing around and getting out of the city whenever they can dash out, cut a ribbon and take credit for it. I have seen the Minister for Veterans' Affairs in Darwin cutting a ribbon on a new veterans' centre he had nothing to do with. I've had various senators in my electorate cutting ribbons at school on something they had nothing to do with. I love to see them, and it's great they get out of the city every now and again.

I want to refer specifically to the infrastructure review, which is more aptly called a razor gang by everyone involved in it. The minister has made a lot of commentary about needing to find headroom in the infrastructure budget, which is a fancy way of saying she plans to cut projects across our communities. Her claim is that projects cannot be funded in the current funding envelope. But I have to ask the minister: how does that apply to a program of works like the Princes Highway corridor program, which had a fixed amount of funding allocated to it? This was a billion-dollar bucket of funding by the previous federal government for road safety projects. There are three states that are involved, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia, and the states and communities put forward their priority projects within the headroom of a billion dollars.

I would like to ask the minister in the consideration in detail: do you guarantee the funding of that program is actually safe. More particularly as a Victorian minister, will you guarantee the $300 million allocated to Victoria is safe from your razor-gang review? Does the minister acknowledge that delaying these road safety project is putting people's lives at risk? I have written to the minister on many occasions about specific road safety projects that were funded, where local priorities had been selected and that had the support of local communities and councils. They are now caught up in this review process. That means that nothing is happening to projects that local communities identified as major safety risks. These projects could have been funded by the headroom of the existing funding provided by the previous federal government. Does the minister acknowledge that delaying road safety project is actually putting lives at risk in a program like the Princes Highway corridor works?

I want to refer specifically to the minister's comments on ABC Radio in relation to the infrastructure review where she said:

… it's to look at every project that is not currently under construction, and that wasn't an election commitment in the last election campaign …

I ask the minister: given that Labor Party election commitments are excluded from the review, were all Labor's infrastructure election commitments subjected to business cases or any cost-benefit analysis in the lead-up to the election? I ask the minister also: if she's excluding Labor election commitments from her razor-gang review but refusing to quarantine vital road safety projects which had been allocated money from a fixed fund, does she understand there is no risk of blowing the budget in that fund if there is a fixed allocation within that headroom? Finally in relation to the review, at what stage is a project under construction? When the consultation, assessment and design work have been done, is it considered to be under construction, or will those projects be scrapped as well?

Dan Repacholi (Hunter, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Nothing brings me more joy than standing in this place as a proud Labor member who represents a regional area to speak about how much regional Australia is thriving because, finally, we have a government who actually cares. Finally there is a government who acts on issues that are important to those in regional Australia, not just a government who has a catchy propaganda slogan on their funny looking puffer vests and election materials campaigning 'There for the regions'. I suppose that if you're out of touch with the communities you represent, dressing up to try to fit in is a last resort. Those opposite can claim all they want, and I can claim that I was a rhythmic gymnast at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games, but it is just your record that counts. If they continue to claim they are for regional Australia then I am a rhythmic gymnastic competitor.

You don't have to look far to see the impact of a government who cares, especially in my electorate. In the Hunter alone this government has provided over a billion dollars of funding to grow a vital part of regional Australia. I see what a Labor government does for regional Australia every day when I drive around my electorate. I can see it in our roads infrastructure, like the Deaves upgrade in Mandalong, a $56 million upgrade to Mandalong Road in Morriset, the Owens Road Bridge in Martinsville, the Kilfoyles Bridge in Lambs Valley, Stanhope Road in Stanhope, the upgrade to the Golden Highway, the upgrade to the Putty Road from Milbrodale to Putty, the Denman Road upgrade, the Wybong Road upgrades and $1.7 million for roads in Cessnock. Even those two vital projects that those opposite did nothing to progress for 10 years, the Singleton and Muswellbrook bypasses, they are a go. The list goes on and on.

I can also see that the Labor government has supported community facilities, like Mums Cottage, which provides vital services for vulnerable people in communities like mine, with $250,000. It's supported the new Hunter Sports Centre. We already know that regional areas dominate when it comes to sport, so they deserve world-class facilities as well. Cessnock is getting a regional skate park and a BMX track, which is great for young people looking for something to do. Singleton netball courts are also getting a $1.1 million upgrade. Muswellbrook Olympic Park is getting a $5.5 million upgrade. The Muswellbrook town centre project is getting $10.5 million to make the centre of Muswellbrook look great. There will be lighting upgrades for Cessnock Goannas rugby league club. The list goes on and on. Cessnock is crying out for better health services, which we are delivering. We're delivering a Medicare urgent care clinic that will be up and open by the end of this year.

It was the Labor Party who very proudly introduced the NBN to bring Australia into the modern world, providing fast and reliable internet so that our country could advance. It was those opposite who botched it.

A government member: They sure did! Was it $60 billion?

Yes, I think it was $60 billion. They tried to be tight with their money, but that $60 billion went a bit over budget, as we all know. I think it was three times the amount we had classified in there. I'm lost on that one.

The people were left worse off, and in regional Australia we were hit the hardest. While the cities had some form of reliable internet, regional areas like mine did not. My office had calls daily from people with internet issues. How can anyone survive and get by in the modern world without fast and reliable internet? Our students need it, our families need it and our businesses desperately need it. In the modern world, regional communities need to be able to rely on internet services that will survive what we deal with these days. We're expanding full-fibre access to an additional 600,000 premises in regional Australia alone. This means in my electorate businesses can run more reliably online, students can do their schoolwork and people can access health services online, meaning no-one will go without when they are in need. The reality is that in regional Australia regional towns don't have all of the services which are available in cities. This makes fast, reliable broadband not just a bonus but a necessity, because it makes these services available to us in the regions.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on what is undoubtably the most important part of the responsibilities of this particular department and its respective ministers; I speak, of course, of the arts. This is a budget which makes a lot of claims about what is being done for the arts sector, but when you look at the details there's a pretty big gap between the rhetoric and the reality.

I want to give credit where credit is due. Certainly, for all who believe that what the Australian arts sector is crying out for is more Commonwealth arts officials, more Commonwealth bureaucrats, this budget is certainly full of good news and good cheer. But I have to confess that, in my time as Commonwealth arts minister, perhaps I spoke to the wrong people but not once in three years did I ever have somebody say to me: 'Minister, what we need is more Commonwealth bureaucrats. That will really get more arts events, productions and festivals being provided all around Australia.'

When we were in government, on this side of the House, our focus, with programs like the highly successful $200 million RISE program, was on getting the money directly to the front line, to get as many shows, productions, festivals and events as possible occurring around all Australia. Indeed, 541 such events were funded by this government. But the present government is very, very keen on more Commonwealth arts officials and more money for buildings in Canberra, even though the reality is that many of those buildings will never be seen by most Australians.

One of the other things the historical record shows us is that record Commonwealth arts funding was seen in 2021-22, with more than $1 billion for the arts funded by the Commonwealth government. In this budget, sadly, this government has not been able to match that level of funding.

But we have seen, of course, more bureaucratic entities being established. We've had the Australia Council abolished and replaced with Creative Australia, but the overseeing body will now be called the Australia Council board. So we hope that's clear. Certainly, I'm sure that a lot of branding consultants spent a lot of time thinking about exactly how to achieve that outcome.

What we also know of this budget is that, of the money that's been claimed to be provided for a range of programs, much has been funded through cancelling programs that were very successful under the previous government—for example, the Temporary Interruption Fund and the balance of the Location Incentive program; both have been cancelled.

What we've also seen in this budget and under the current minister—and I have to say it's very disappointing that the arts minister is not here; he's also Leader of the House, so he's got no excuse, in terms of not being aware of when this fitted into the parliamentary agenda, so it's very disappointing he's not able to be here—are some rather curious approaches. For example, in the last budget under the coalition government, March 2022, there was an extra $20 million provided for the RISE fund. So there was money ready to be spent immediately upon the new government coming to office, to fund new events and productions, festivals and shows all around the country. Bizarrely, the minister chose not to spend it. But things got even more bizarre when we got to the October budget because then there was the proud announcement of the Live Performance Support Fund. It turned out that that was supposedly going to be part of the broader 'supporting the arts' program. Apparently, this was going to support shows that might be under threat because of COVID. Nothing more was heard of it, and then, in the budget in May this year, that program met its untimely demise without one dollar having been spent—one of the many mysteries of Burkean arts administration.

Let me ask the following questions in relation to Creative Australia: How many additional bureaucrats will be funded by this budget and how much will that cost? How many positions will there be on the Australia Council board? How many people will be on each of the new sub-entities being established within Creative Australia, formerly the Australia Council? What will be the additional cost incurred for all of those people? What will be the amount of funding, after the bureaucrats have been paid, which will actually go to artists to deliver performances, events, festivals and exhibitions? What happened to the $20 million of extra funding that was there for RISE? What happened to the Live Performance Support Fund? These are enduring mysteries of Burkean arts administration, Deputy Speaker, and I'd suggest to you that now is a time when these mysteries could be cleared up, and the Australian people would be well served if that were to happen.

Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

First of all, let me say, Deputy Speaker: as the Manager of Opposition Business, he should know to call and refer to members by their proper titles. He went on a bit of a frolic. He seemed to be in a good mood, so we didn't want to stop him, but he should refer to members by their proper titles.

It does give me a chance to start on this consideration in detail—

James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'd ask the previous member to refer to members using proper titles.

Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. It does allow me to start, in this consideration in detail, on the arts portfolio—one that the Manager of Opposition Business used to hold—because there have been some major changes in the way in which this government is delivering arts policy versus the way the previous government delivered it. We're not interested in doing press conferences with Guy Sebastian or doing it with businesses without actually ending up supporting those businesses and embarrassing Mr Sebastian. That's not our style.

We're also not interested in having the arts portfolio being run out of the minister's office. One of the key things that the previous government did in the arts portfolio was to have this situation where they, in the minister's office—a tradition started by George Brandis, the previous arts minister and former senator—took money out of the Australia Council, put it in separate funds and then had the minister hand-pick which programs and which bits of creative work would be supported. It's a terrible way of doing policy. One of the key differences that happened in this budget was that the government put money back into what was formerly known as the Australia Council and will now fall under the banner of Creative Australia.

In my electorate, in Macnamara, I was so proud to host the Prime Minister and the Minister for the Arts and many of our colleagues at the Gershwin Room at the Espy in St Kilda, the home of live music in Melbourne. I'm sure, Deputy Speaker Stevens, that you've spent a night or two there on the sticky floors of the Gershwin Room, enjoying yourself. It is a great venue. One of thing about which there was this big sigh of relief from the industry was that money was not going to be dictated by the minister's office. What would happen was that there were going to be industry led decisions by people who were able to make proper, informed decisions—not based on politics or on marginal electorates or on the personal preference of what art the minister's does or doesn't like, but rather on independent advice made by the industry itself. It is the appropriate way to develop arts policy. It's been a stain on the previous government's legacy and one that we fixed in this budget.

I would ask the minister what his view is around why it was so important to change the way in which arts policy was being delivered in this country and why it was so important to have a national cultural policy developed.

The other thing that's worth noting in this budget, which is a significant change in the way in which government operates, is obviously the way in which infrastructure has been funded and the way in which infrastructure is going to be rolled out as part of the Albanese government. My electorate of Macnamara is one of the great spots. If you want to go to one of the St Kilda East cafes—you might want to go to Las Chicas or Batch or All Things Equal, one of the great cafes on Carlisle Street—you'll drive past Balaclava station. Behind Balaclava station there is an absolutely fantastic new social housing estate that's being rolled out. It's a fantastic collaboration between three different tiers of government: the federal government, the state government and the local council.

The interesting thing is that the previous government allocated $15 million from the car park program of the former Morrison government to Balaclava station. Interestingly, they had plans to build car parks out the back of Balaclava station, which is quite surprising. It came as quite a surprise to both the state government and the City of Port Philip, who already had an agreement signed for what the land was going to be utilised for: the building of social housing. The former government had this whole infrastructure program, they'd written this whole press release—in fact, dare I say it, I think the former minister had come into Balaclava to do a press conference—but they hadn't actually spoken to the levels of government that not only had custodianship of the land but owned the land. It was Crown land. It is absolutely mind-blowing how terrible that rollout of policy was.

My question to the minister for infrastructure is: why is it important to speak to other layers of government and to work with them to roll out infrastructure and to not repeat the mistakes of the previous Morrison government?

Llew O'Brien (Wide Bay, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 17 November 2022, just after the October budget, the office of the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government told the people of Gympie and the Fraser Coast that federal funding for the Tiaro bypass was budgeted and ready to flow as Queensland achieved its agreed construction milestones.

A spokesperson for the minister, in the Maryborough Sun newspaper on 17 November, said that construction was due to start in early 2023 and was due for completion in late 2024, weather and construction conditions permitting. The minister even wrote to me on 21 November, confirming the $268.8 million dollar commitment from the federal government. Then, just six months later, in the May 2023 budget, the same minister said the Tiaro bypass was being pushed into a 90-day review.

Why did the minister commit to get the job done by the end of 2024 and then refer it to a review that could axe the program? Why hasn't the minister quarantined the four-lane Tiaro bypass from the review in the same way she has done with the Brisbane Olympics?

The Bruce Highway between Gympie and Maryborough is one of the deadliest sections of the nation's national highway, with 16 serious crashes and five fatalities so far this year. With 11,000 vehicle movements on this stretch, if this section of the national highway were in any other jurisdiction, it would already be four lanes. At the rate the federal and state Labor governments are going, all of the infrastructure for the 2032 Brisbane Olympics will be in place long before we see the Bruce Highway four-laned between Gympie and Maryborough. When will the four-lane Tiaro bypass be finished, and when will the remaining two-lane section of the highway between Gympie and Maryborough area be four-laned?

The former coalition government committed $18 million from the Community Development Grants Program fund for a water security project in Maryborough. Negotiations between Sunwater, CANEGROWERS, Rural Funds Management and the minister's department were proceeding well, right up until the federal election in May 2022, when the Australian government went into caretaker mode before the election. Following the change of government, I wrote to the Treasurer asking for the $18 million commitment to be maintained. He didn't reply to my letter, but I was heartened when Minister King said at the time of the October 2022 budget that she would honour the coalition's original funding allocation. But, in the time following, communications between the stakeholders fell silent until a bombshell revelation in Senate estimates on 23 May, when departmental official Meghan Hibbert claimed that Sunwater advised the department on 24 March that it wouldn't proceed with the grant. This conflicts with the advice from Sunwater, which claimed in a presentation to Maryborough stakeholders as recently as 30 May that it was actually the federal government which terminated the grant.

Why didn't the government allow the parties to conclude their negotiations with the department to enable the project to proceed? This is an extremely valuable project for local agriculture. Contract variations and extensions are done all the time by the department, so why didn't the minister extend the grant instead of withdrawing it, as Sunwater has alleged, and not giving more time to allow the project to be delivered? It begs the question: with the Borumba Dam pumped hydro project now proposed and with the federal government funding it, is there a relationship between that project and the starving of agriculture locally of vitally needed water?

Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I always appreciate the opportunity to hear from the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. Recently, I was happy to have Minister King visiting the Bellevue Railcar Manufacturing Facility, along with the new Premier of Western Australia, Roger Cook, and state transport minister Rita Saffioti. Thanks to federal and state government commitments, we were able to see firsthand the product of our local manufacturing of railcars, which are ready to roll out on Perth's Metronet.

Virtually every kilometre of track in the Perth railway system is there because of the foresight and the commitment of Labor governments. The track will soon reach all the way up to Ellenbrook, in the north of my electorate of Hasluck. The statistics are impressive. We are delivering 246 new railcars for the Perth public transport network as part of Metronet and over $3.9 billion for 16 Metronet projects in Western Australia, with nine currently being delivered or in planning. We're partnering with the Labor government of Western Australia, with Roger Cook, to deliver 72 kilometres of new passenger rail and 23 new stations and upgrades, including my favourite, the Morley-Ellenbrook line; the Yanchep rail extension; the Thornlie-Cockburn link; and the new Lakelands station, on the Mandurah line. More than 10,000 jobs are expected to be created across our Metronet projects, providing a significant boost for the economy and opportunities for our local businesses.

We are also ensuring that Western Australia's public transport network is working towards our net zero future. The Albanese Labor government is investing $125 million towards the electric bus infrastructure in Perth, which will be matched by the WA government, for the acquisition of 130 locally manufactured electric buses.

The May budget includes a significant investment in infrastructure by the federal government. For Hasluck, it's important for funding to keep pace with the growth of the population in what is one of the fastest-growing areas in Perth and the country. The budget provides, amongst other allocations, $500 million for the Roads to Recovery Program, $300 million for national road network maintenance, and $110 million for the Black Spot Program, with the local governments of Kalamunda, Swan and Mundaring receiving their share. In Ellenbrook, the federal and state Labor governments, together with the City of Swan, are making the Ellenbrook public pool a reality. The pool is planned to be co-located with the Ellenbrook train station, and together they will no doubt become a major new community meeting place for residents of all ages. Infrastructure doesn't just build a train station, a road or a pool—it transforms communities.

There is over $200 million in the budget to establish the Thriving Suburbs Program to enhance the liveability and prosperity of our neighbourhoods. This government is committed to ensuring that people have equitable access not only to jobs and services but also to the amenities and sustainable living that we all deserve to enjoy in our communities. There is also over $150 million for the Urban Precincts and Partnerships Program to rejuvenate the town centres we all gravitate around in outer urban areas like my electorate of Hasluck. Good design from the outset is so important, and this applies to urban planning in the broad and in the design of neighbourhoods that are people-centric, aesthetically pleasing and ecologically sustainable, right down to the design of our housing. I recently just visited Green Homes Australia's nine-plus-star display home in Brabham with Minister McAllister. We need to set high standards and have high expectations of the houses, communities, suburbs and cities that we design and live in. To that end, there is $11 million to establish a Cities and Suburbs Unit within the department of infrastructure to deliver a national urban policy, as well as reports that will provide an ongoing picture of life in our biggest cities.

The people who call our suburbs home deserve cities that work for them, from affordable housing, access to jobs and services, and efficient transport networks to better-designed neighbourhoods. I know one of the reasons I was elected in Hasluck was because people were fed up to their back teeth with the Morrison government's rorts and secret deals. We didn't know just how much was going on behind the scenes, but people were aware their government projects were rorted and that processes were not fair. All of the programs being administered by this government, including the new ones I have mentioned, will be administered through fair and transparent processes, which will go a long way towards restoring the trust in government so damaged by the coalition.

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a number of questions for the Minister for Communications, who doesn't appear to be here, so I look forward to the answers on behalf of the minister. Why has the minister taken no action in her portfolio to reduce the level of gambling advertising in more than a year? What is taking so long? Why is the policy process on gambling advertising being outsourced to a parliamentary committee? Shouldn't the minister be leading in this important policy area? If the minister was willing to take action in relation to credit cards in gambling advertising, which is supported by the gambling industry, why isn't she willing to take action in relation to gambling advertising, which is not supported by the gambling industry? Will the government support the opposition's bill in the Senate to ban gambling advertising during live sport? Is the minister willing to take on the gambling lobby? Finally, and importantly, does the minister believe that she enjoys the full confidence of her colleagues on this issue?

Artificial intelligence is an incredibly important issue. The minister is responsible for the regulation of the internet, and AI represents the biggest issue in internet regulation since the creation of the internet. Given this, can the minister explain why she is not responsible—or even, apparently, jointly responsible—for the government's policy response on AI? The minister has had very little to say on AI. Can she explain why she has been so absent from this debate? Does the minister agree that it is curious in the least that the Prime Minister has allocated this crucial task not to her but to the Minister for Industry and Science?

Now, I'm very concerned about the minister's conduct in relation to round 6 of the Mobile Black Spot Program. In that round, 54 locations were chosen to receive funding for mobile black spots. I want to be very, very clear on this, because the last thing I want to do is mischaracterise what has gone on here, so I thought that what I'd do is actually directly quote from the minister in an interview that she had on 2GB with Ben Fordham on this issue. I think it's quite illuminating, so I'll run through that. It leads to a couple of questions. Mr Fordham said:

Of the 27 sites selected in New South Wales, how many are in Labor electorates?

The minister replied:

Well, we made it very clear that in these areas we would ensure that we meet our election commitments. So there were a number in New South Wales and a number in other states as well.

Mr Fordham:

Sure. Can we focus on answers though, Minister, because there's no harm—you've pointed out that you made commitments; you're following through. So let's have a number in the answer here. Out of the 27 sites selected in New South Wales, how many are in Labor electorates?

The minister:

Well, I would know that we consulted widely in these electorates—

Fordham:

You're not answering the question, Minister.

The minister:

Well, clearly we have a list of all those electorates, Ben, and where they are—

Fordham:

Did you want me to answer the question for you?

The minister:

It's up to you, Ben, but—

Fordham:

All right. Well, I'm happy to do it. Out of the 27 sites selected in New South Wales, all 27 are in Labor electorates. That's the answer. It's 27 out of 27.

There's another really interesting section on this interview.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm glad to see the level of engagement from those opposite. Mr Fordham goes on to say:

Okay. Is it correct that you hand-picked every one of the sites in Round 6?

The minister replies:

Well, Ben, let's again be clear. This was based on community feedback—

Mr Fordham:

Yeah yes. You've told us that stuff Minister. Now, we're moving on to whether or not you hand-picked the sites. Yes or no?

The minister:

Well, this was based on community feedback and—

Fordham:

You've told us about the feedback, Minister.

Minister:

Myself as the Shadow Minister for Communications working with those candidates and MPs decided that these were areas that we chose to—

Fordham:

All right. So, you hand-picked them, yeah?

Minister:

Well, certainly, as the Shadow Minister at the time—

Fordham:

Certainly. All right. I'll put that down as a yes, yeah?

Minister:

Please do.

So this was the first time that the minister had explicitly acknowledged hand-picking the 54 sites and, indeed, that all 27 in New South Wales were in Labor electorates. It raises a number of very concerning questions, obviously.

The minister has refused to provide a single document in relation to an FOI application on round 6 of the Mobile Black Spot Program—no documents. So will the minister reverse her decision and allow the public access to the documents held by her office on the program? If not, why not? The Auditor-General has said that there is merit in a potential audit of round 6 of the Mobile Black Spot Program. If the minister won't publicly release those documents under FOI, will she provide them now to the Auditor-General to assist in his assessment of this issue, and if not, why not? (Time expired)

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to start by addressing some of the issues that have been raised in this chamber by the former minister for the arts, the member for Bradfield. There's this rhetoric going through those opposite that the large additional funding that this Albanese Labor government has provided to the arts is somehow not going to end up with artists themselves. Right from the start, let's get some facts straight about how funds have been distributed traditionally by the Australian Council. Let's look at their track record.

The Australia Council will, of course, be known as Creative Australia under our changes. In the last financial year, the Australia Council invested 95 per cent of its budget back into the arts sector, with just five per cent spent on overheads and operational costs. That is 95 per cent of the funds going to artist and projects. The planned increase in staffing levels that is going to be included in the way we move forward is because the arts sector has asked us to do more. The sector has asked the government to provide more to it. In order to manage that, you obviously need to have a few more people to help do it. But if you look at the percentages, we don't see any reason why the percentage difference will change, and that's one of the fundamental things about the efficiency of the way the arts sector works.

In our national cultural policy, we're very proud to be providing more funding and more direction for the arts sector, knowing how efficiently this organisation to be known as Creative Australia will work. I think it is also really important to point out a key change in the significant increase that we are providing to funding. There is an additional $949.5 million being invested over the next four years in the arts sector. One of the key things we are doing is making sure that the decisions about which artists and which arts projects get funded are going to be made independent of the minister. Instead they'll be made by the Australia Council and Creative Australia, not the RISE Fund that those opposite instigated where funds were taken away from the independent decision-making process, and which projects were funded was in the lap of the minister, depending on the minister's preferences.

When we talk about additional funding, we also know that we are bringing back integrity, the integrity that the arts sector knows and appreciates. Those opposite can roll their eyes about it, but we know this system has been supported over decades by governments of all colours until just recently, and so we are very proud to see that sort of change come in. This record new investment in the sector is going to safeguard our national institutions. It will train and support creatives, and it will deliver on the vision of our new National Cultural Policy—Revive. We've really set a new course for the sector that builds on the proud legacy of previous governments. We're bringing back drive, direction and vision to a $17 billion industry that employs more than 400,000 Australians so that we are empowering talented artists and organisations to thrive and grow.

When we look at the breakdown of that funding, $535.3 million is to secure the future of our most cherished cultural and historical institutions, things like the National Gallery, the National Library, the Film and Sound Archive and the National Archives. They have a crucial place in our cultural history and in our future. There is also $33 million to secure the long-term viability of the National Library's Trove database, and I am sure every one of us has constituents who use that database for family history, but it is also a key academic resource. There is $286 million to deliver on Revive, including establishing Creative Australia, Music Australia, Writers Australia and a creative workplaces centre, which is what arts workers have told us they want. It's also for establishing a First Nations led body dedicated to First Nations work. There is also $9.3 million for Australia's eight national arts training organisations, and I've met with leaders of all of these organisations. These are the sorts of investments in skilling up Australians for this sector that have been neglected for a decade, and we are taking seriously the rebuilding of our very vital arts sector.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have hit peak hubris. The fact that those opposite wouldn't present the minister for consideration in detail on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024 is evidence of peak hubris. But it is worse than that because I have come here to talk about road safety. Given what has happened on the weekend, the fact that the minister is not here is not only peak hubris but disrespectful. Quarterly road fatalities increased by 3.7 per cent from the December 2022 quarter to the March 2023 quarter. In the 12 months to March 2023 road death increased in our nation by 5.9 per cent compared to the previous 12 months. Let us put that in raw numbers: that is 67 additional lives lost over that 12-month period—additional lives lost. Devastatingly, of course, we have lost many more since. These figures are sobering. Every road death is tragic. It is not just a number; it is a family member, a partner, a friend, a child, a parent, a member of the local community. The statistics are important, but so is data about how we design the path forward. Numbers tell stories, and these stories guide policy formation in this place—or at least they should—in order that we might bring the numbers down. If the numbers are going up, the policy settings are clearly not right, and we need to look at relevant specific data to understand how we might be able to change that tragic trajectory to save lives.

Australia's National road safety strategy 2021-2030 sets out Australia's ambition to reduce annual road fatalities by at least 50 per cent by 2030, but, without in-depth analysis of the causes of crashes, we have little hope of implementing the most effective interventions needed to even come close to achieving this target. We need data regarding serious injuries, road quality, crash causes, and details regarding people and cars involved to assist us in knowing where and how to target road safety initiatives. The AAA managing director, Michael Bradley, knows this. So do his AAA members. They, of course, are the NRMA, RACV, RACQ, RAA, RAC, RACT and AANT. Michael said:

It is not enough to know how many people were killed in road crashes—we also need to know how they were killed, and how to prevent these deaths in the future.

It's also fair that Australians should be satisfied that the investment in the national road network is being made where it's needed. Road deaths are rising, and those opposite are reluctant to ensure data is collected and reported in a transparent way to inform road infrastructure investment.

The Commonwealth's failure to facilitate the timely, consistent and open reporting of national road safety data is impeding Australia quantifying its road safety problem, developing evidence based responses or evaluating their effectiveness. It's not credible that, during the height of the pandemic, COVID data was published daily regarding infection numbers, vaccine rates, gender, age and location of hospitalisations, yet data failings, it is said, prevent us from knowing how many Australians are injured in road crashes each year and what factors led to those.

My question to the minister, if she were here, is: what reassurance can the government give that the funding allocated to road safety in the budget will actually deliver road safety outcomes? The second question I ask is: how will the government quantify the road safety task in our nation and how will the government develop evidence based responses and evaluate the effectiveness of those responses? Noting the current National Partnership Agreement on Land Transport Infrastructure Projects is due to expire on 30 June 2024, will the government leverage the significant land transport infrastructure funding it provides states and territories to incentivise the provision of priority road safety data as a condition of funding? Finally, the Road Safety Program is the only program that specifically requires states and territories to provide specific road safety data as a condition of family. How many states and territories have provided this data, and has funding been withheld for projects in those jurisdictions that refuse to provide this data? Those are the questions for the minister if she were here.

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll address the member for Barker's comments there. As the chair of Tasmania's black spot panel, I take a particular interest in road safety, and I'm quite dismayed, quite frankly, to see this issue being politicised by the member for Barker. The road safety national strategy draft form was released after two years under the former government when we came to government, and to see it being used in this partisan manner by the member for Barker is really beyond words.

In my electorate of Lyons, as in rural and regional electorates across Australia, one of the biggest issues facing communities is access to affordable and reliable internet and telecommunications. Since the election, the Albanese government has been getting on with the job of improving telecommunications across Lyons. Last year a dedicated round of Mobile Black Spot Program funding invested $40 million into addressing known mobile communications issues at 54 target locations, including Sheffield, Ansons Bay and Tea Tree. More recently, I was very pleased to announce the completion of new macro cell base stations in Murdunna and Pyengana, providing new and improved mobile coverage to these communities and surrounding areas. These stations will deliver safety and social benefits to those living in, working in and travelling through the regions and will enhance protections during emergencies and natural disasters.

The growing use of video streaming and more people working and studying than ever before means access to fast reliable and affordable broadband has never been more important. Indeed, the former Rudd government understood the importance to regional Australia because the original NBN plan, before it was busted up by the Morrison-Abbott-Turnbull governments, had a focus on regional Australia. That's why we put the NBN first—fibre to the home, fibre to the premises—across regional communities. The Liberals came to power 2013, tore that up, focused on the cities instead, left the regions behind and grew the digital divide.

Since we have come back to government, we are intent, under the Minister for Communications, on fixing this. The Albanese government is committed to improving the NBN to give Australians access to 21st century communications infrastructure, no matter where they live. We are investing $2.4 billion to expand full-fibre NBN to an additional 1.5 million premises; 660,000 of them are in regional areas. That is in addition to our $480 million grant to upgrade the fixed wireless network, to upgrade the Liberals and Nationals' promise never delivered. I see the minister for regional Australia here nodding her head. She, too, like me, is a regional MP who understands the importance of regional communications. Across the NBN—satellite, fixed-line and fixed-wireless networks—our government is delivering for the millions of Australians who live outside capitals, including the 7,500 households in Lyons, using satellite broadband, many of whom now have access to uncapped satellite broadband. They can contact the NBN for information on that. My question to the minister on the matter is: Please outline how the government's $480 million investment to upgrade NBN fixed wireless services will improve connectivity in regional areas.

Just before I finish, from the arts section of the megaportfolio, I was pleased to see on the weekend the Bay of Fires Winter Festival. It was held on the East Coast, up in the north-east. A major prize winner was Robyn Harman for Grummet Island. Many thanks to the volunteers, sponsors, partners, including Break O'Day Council, for that festival. This goes of course to the importance of regional arts under the Australian government's Revive program.

The people's choice award went to Jan Clement—congratulations, Jan, for Time Stands Still. The major prize people's choice award went to Britt Fazey. Anita Denholm created the wonderful Gazing Out Across the Track of Time and Tides or better known as the Lady of the Bay sculpture, which now takes pride of place on Georges Bay on the multi-user track up there in St Helens. This just goes to the strength of regional arts across my electorate—the East Coast, Northern Midlands, the Deloraine Crafts Fair, the South-East Arts community, Spring Bay down there in Orford and Triabunna. In the Southern Midlands, I will hand back an art work and they will get a new one on their rent scheme. They are looking forward to that in a few weeks. Plus there is a great live music culture. My question is just how important are regional arts to Revive?

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In Queensland every year for 20 years, we've built a giant developmental agricultural dam. Every year for 20 years, we have put down over 600, arguably 700, kilometres of railway line to develop the mining wealth of Queensland. Every year for 20 years we have built a giant resort, a billion-dollar tourist resort. In the 33 years since the fall of the old Country Party government, there's not been a dam built, not been a single inch of railway line put down and not a single tourist resort been built. 'Red Ted', easily the most important person in Australian history—I didn't say that; Paul Keating said that; I didn't say that; Malcolm Fraser said that—said, 'The job of government is to provide real work for our people', not make believe government jobs paid for by robbing Peter over here to pay Paul over there but real wealth-creating jobs.' That's what he wrote to Chifley halfway through the Depression. It is the job of government. When I say 'government', I include the media and the banks.

Just have a look at what you can create. You build a dam at Hughenden and 150 people get a farm to live on that will give them an income of nearly half a million dollars a year. It's so easy. All you've got to do is build a dam. Now, this is on a river that isn't a river—it's only a river for about a month of the year if you're lucky. It's just a flood plain, that's all. We just keep a little bit of that flood. The great Ernie Bridge, the first First Australian to become a cabinet minister in Australian history and the Watering Australia Foundation president—Slim Dusty, I and others were on that board—said, 'All we are asking for is that the great rivers of Australia, on their brief rampage to the sea, pay a small tribute to those people who live upon its banks.' What a beautiful statement.

The great Dr Bradfield, the greatest builder in Australian history—I won't go into everything that he built—said, 'By filling Lake Eyre with water, we can turn inland Australia into Ghirraween.' It's a First Australian word which means 'the land of flowers'. There is no doubt in my mind that if you fill Webb Lake with water, there will be a very significant rainfall in the driest part of Australia. I represent a place where it never stops raining. It's Paradise Coast, between Townsville and Cairns. It's a 100-inch rainfall area. It never stops raining. All Dr Bradfield said was to take a little tiny bit of that water and send it out to supplement the giant Flinders River. That's all. That's all he was saying.

Where there is a barren wilderness, there's not a single kangaroo in a thousand kilometres by a thousand kilometres: the mid-west plains are as flat as a billiard ball table, and, of course, there's no surface water, so no kangaroos. There's nothing there at the present moment except prickly trees, an introduced species, which is a B of a thing, and the Julia Creek dunnart. It's doomed to oblivion, because if the prickly trees don't get it then the pigs will, and the government is doing nothing about either of them. We have a wilderness which is running to rack and ruin and eroding away into the Gulf of Carpentaria, and we can make it Ghirraween—a land of flowers—with a little bit of money to build a dam, a tunnel and a fairly long canal. Just push up some ground, and the water flows out onto this western plain, which has the richest soils in the world—the vertosol soils of inland Queensland. They're not my comments; they're comments by professional— (Time expired)

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's fantastic to be here representing my ministerial colleagues tonight and listening to some of the contributions that have been made around the room on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024. I think the important thing here is what we're not going to do, and we are not going to replicate what the former Morrison government did, because transparency, integrity and prioritising delivery over announcement is absolutely the key focus of our government.

I'm proud to stand here tonight and outline what the Albanese Labor government has achieved for our regions in less than 12 months. We have done more in those 12 months than the former government did in 10 years, because our regions deserve much more than just a grant program. We want regional Australia to seize the huge opportunities that come with a shift to cheap, clean, renewable energy, a shift that has been deliberately blocked for over a decade. Every time we've looked at big regional programs dreamt up by the former government, we've seen real problems: an Inland Rail which blew out by $31 billion under the former government and didn't go to a port, an infrastructure pipeline that blew out from 150 projects to 800 without any additional funding, and projects that were promised but without funding partners. In just 12 months we've delivered and are laying the foundations for a better future.

In our very first budget, we committed a billion dollars to new regional programs. We've provided increased connectivity by properly funding the NBN rollout and fixing mobile phone black spots. We've seen more housing assistance through the expansion of the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee, skills assistance through our fee-free TAFE places and funds for increased disaster resilience and mitigation.

Labor's fiscally responsible 2023-24 budget continues to deliver for regional Australians and recognises the importance of helping them build our economy with significant investments, from our $2 billion Hydrogen Headstart fund to the $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund. We are supporting regional Australia and its industries by investing a billion dollars to strengthen our national biosecurity system. We're supporting people across the nation with a historic investment of $3.5 billion to triple the Medicare bulk-billing incentive, the largest increase in the 40-year history of Medicare. We've got a regional investment framework that puts regional Australians at the heart of our decision-making. We want regional Australia to receive a fair share of the prosperity it creates, which is why the National Reconstruction Fund will drive the economic engines in our regions. It's why the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund will support regional Australia, which is crying out for housing. Our Powering the Regions Fund will deliver new industries to regional Australia.

We are amending the Northern Australian Infrastructure Facility Act to extend eligibility for NAIF financing to Christmas Island and Cocos (Keeling) Islands, the IOTs, enabling assistance, support and opportunity for their residents and businesses to diversify and create economic development. As Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories, I want to congratulate my colleague, Minister Madeleine King, for taking this important step of including the IOTs in the NAIF. Providing financial assistance to progress economic growth in our remote territories is incredibly important, and it took a Labor government to achieve that.

Our review of the Infrastructure Investment Program will clean up the mess left by those opposite in the previous 10 years, with a $120 billion infrastructure investment pipeline that blew out in projects but didn't add a single dollar. We want to work with the states and territories, we want to work with our local government partners and we want to see collaboration across the board because that's how projects get delivered in our communities. Under the previous government, projects were left without adequate funding or resources, without real benefits to the public for whom they were approved and with a clogged-up pipeline that has caused delays and overruns in important nation-building projects. It's proof that you can't build a road on a press release. You can't change economies by 30-second media grabs. For those opposite, it was all about the announcement and never about the delivery. The difference with this government is that we are prepared to do the work to get things done.

I just heard the former shadow communications minister mentioning community feedback. Apparently community feedback's a bad idea and projects should just be decided by ministers with their spreadsheets in front of them. The member for Barker talked about road safety funding. We've established the National Road Safety Action Plan and have got an inquiry into how we can help our communities and councils, in particular, fix up our road network. We're not sitting here taking up space. We're getting things done. The opposition had the chance to do that in their 10 years of government and failed at every turn. We are delivering and we are doing that on behalf of all of Australia.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

Anne Aly (Cowan, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the investments that the Albanese Labor government is making in the education portfolio, and I'd particularly like to make mention of my colleague Minister Jason Clare, the Minister for Education, and thank him for the significant work he has done over the last year to build an education system that supports children to play, to learn and to thrive.

Labor governments have a long history of putting the education of our children front and centre of all that we do. I'm proud to be part of an Albanese government that is continuing this tradition by taking action to deliver a stronger, fairer and more accessible education system than the one we inherited. With the latest budget, the Albanese government is taking action to respond to immediate education workforce challenges while building a better and fairer education system for the future. We know that central to building a better and fairer education system is investing in teachers, educators and support staff that make the system work.

This budget invests $72.4 million in crucial initiatives, including professional development opportunities, to support early educators. That package will benefit more than 80,000 early childhood educators, with a targeted focus on regional and remote services and First Nations organisations. We know that this will make a real difference for educators; we know that because this package has been designed in direct response to the feedback that I have had through my numerous consultations with educators, with teachers and with people in the sector, who specifically asked for professional development and practicum support. By providing access to professional development opportunities, we are making it easier for early childhood educators to progress their careers.

This package has been widely welcomed by key organisations, including Early Childhood Australia, the Australian Childcare Alliance and Community Early Learning Australia. The budget also includes a further $9.3 million to implement the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan, building on the $328 million already invested. It includes $40.4 million in additional funding for schools in Central Australia, to increase school enrolment and student engagement and to improve learning outcomes in those areas.

In higher education, the budget delivers $128.5 million to fund 4,000 additional university places over the next four years. That will boost the number of graduates from STEM disciplines and support our AUKUS program. Of these additional places, 800 will be allocated to South Australian universities, with the remaining places located across the country. Importantly, the budget represents a down payment on the government's big reform initiatives underway across early childhood education, across schools and across higher education, ensuring that our children and our young people can access a quality education no matter where they live, no matter what their background is and no matter who their parents are.

We've launched a comprehensive Productivity Commission Inquiry into Australia's Early Childhood Education and Care System—a very timely inquiry, I might add. That review is a vital and important step as we look to chart the path to universal access to early childhood education and care. We're also looking to the future of the school system with our Review to Inform a Better and Fairer Education System, as it is titled. It's an opportunity to drive real and measurable improvements for all school students, particularly those most at risk and falling behind. We're encouraging teachers, parents and students to take part in a national survey for that review.

The other major education reform work underway is the development of an Australian Universities Accord. It's a broad review of Australia's higher education system and, again, another opportunity to drive long-lasting reform. An expert panel will make recommendations to government about how we can ensure that our higher education system meets the nation's needs over the next decades. We're very proud of these individual pieces of reform that we have underway, which I know will work together to develop a stronger, fairer and much more accessible education system for all Australians. This builds on our election commitment to make early childhood education more affordable for 1.2 million families across Australia. We've already acted to deliver just that. (Time expired)

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I begin by saying just how disappointing it is that this government is showing contempt for this process of consideration in detail of the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024. In the previous session that was held in this very room, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government did not bother to attend, the Minister for Communications did not bother to attend and the Minister for the Arts did not bother to attend. In this consideration in detail stage, concerning education, the Minister for Education could not be bothered to attend. This government came to power with a commitment to greater parliamentary accountability and scrutiny, and it is showing complete contempt for the principles that it campaigned on, the promises that it made to the Australian people, by failing to make available the appropriate cabinet ministers.

I can tell you this did not happen under the previous government. This previous government took this process seriously. I know that the member for Gippsland, in his distinguished service as a cabinet minister, always made sure he was here. Similarly, I always made sure as a cabinet minister that I took this process seriously. What we have had demonstrated today by the government today is complete contempt for the parliament, and every Labor parliamentarian here should be feeling ashamed of themselves that we have not had this process taken seriously. It is very important that that point be put on the record.

The sad reality is that the approach of this government to the education portfolio has been shambolic and slipshod. Let's have a look at what we've seen from the minister. Perhaps the reason the minister didn't want to attend is because his personal track record is so dismal. Instead of addressing the issues that it was promised in the lead-up to the election would be addressed, we've simply had a plethora of reviews being announced. There is a Productivity Commission review into child care. There is a school funding review. What is the need for the school funding review? The then opposition leader, now Prime Minister, made a commitment—and since coming to government the Prime Minister and the current minister have repeated the commitment—to fund government schools at 100 per cent of the schooling resource standard. Why is there a need to review? Get on and deliver the commitment. It's pretty straightforward. Then there's also the so-called Universities Accord. It appears frequently in the government's talking points, but it has not yet seen the light of day.

What we've seen in this budget is a whole range of cuts across the wide reach of the education portfolio: $756 million cut from government schools across the country; nearly $50 million cut from Closing the Gap educational initiatives; $36.9 million cut from the Strategic University Reform Fund and the Regional Research Collaboration Program; and $11.3 million cut from the national school reform fund and quality outcomes program. Then, of course, there is this minister's curious approach to the challenge that we now see with the indexation of HECS debts at 7.1 per cent, the highest in 30 years. Particularly, to add insult to injury, students are being charged indexation rates on debt they have already repaid in full. The opposition is very clear: we call on the government to repay Australians who are hit with indexation penalties on student loans they have already paid off.

I want to ask the minister the following questions. Perhaps this can be conveyed to him by carrier pigeon or some other method that the government members who are here might choose to use. Can the minister explain why he needs a review into school funding when he has already given his commitment to lock in the schooling resource standard funding? Can the minister confirm how many students will be impacted by the government's decision to roll out Startup Year loans? This Startup Year loan program is highly risky. It could cripple students with up to $23,600 of debt for full fee-paying university courses that they can currently do for free, such as those offered by the University of Technology Sydney's startup hub. Has the government commissioned any modelling to examine the full impact this scheme will have on students in the context of the cost-of-living crisis? Why is the government of the view that the Startup Year program is necessary, given that accelerator programs are offered at many universities across the country? (Time expired)

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a great pleasure to follow the shadow minister for confected outrage in debate on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024. It really is ridiculous when those on the other side complain about our evidence based education policies, where the 'lifters and leaners approach', if I can put it that way, of the previous government did a lot of harm to some of the most disadvantaged people in our communities. I thank the minister for Early Childhood Education very much for her work and her dedication as she and her team have been advancing in early education in our country. Indeed, she has visited—

A government member: They don't want to talk about that, do they?

No, they don't want to talk about that at all. The minister has in fact been to my electorate on a number of occasions. It was a pleasure to welcome her recently to a childcare centre in my electorate that's providing the very best care and early childhood education to my constituents' children. I'm very, very proud to be part of a government that understands the importance of early intervention and of early childhood education. We are giving some of the most disadvantaged access to early childhood education for the first time in this country. We know that the evidence base is there to show that intervention for these kids increases their educational progress in both primary and secondary school. The education that is given in early childhood will hold them in good stead for the rest of their lives. It will mean some of the most disadvantaged kids from the most disadvantaged families will benefit from that for the rest of their lives. I'm very proud to be part of a government that promotes this as its policy. My electorate of Macarthur is very fortunate to be home to some wonderful early education centres, which I visited in my previous role as a paediatrician. Those centres include Squiggles and Giggles in Emerald Hills; Good Start Early Learning in Willowdale, which the minister visited; Raising Stars in Gregory Hills; and St Helens Park Long Day Care Centre.

I've visited all these sites in my electorate, and I can see how the kids benefit. I can see the dedicated work of the teachers and staff, including the staff who cook and clean and support the families, and I'm proud to be part of that. This government's policies in early childhood education will benefit 9,200 Macarthur families, which is more than previously, and in total 1.2 million Australian families will have access to early childhood education from 1 July because we are increasing the childcare subsidy. In doing so we are helping make early childhood education more affordable and accessible to all, and we know that equitable access to early childhood education is very important. Some of our family will save up to $2,000 in the first year of our plan alone. This means more children getting access to the transformational benefits of early learning, regardless of their circumstances, and in the long run bolstering the wealth and health of our country

There's a staggering number of children who are potentially missing out on early childhood education due to inequitable access and affordability. Those on the opposite side should understand that well. A major contributing factor is the poor planning of the previous New South Wales government in my home state and the lack of early childhood education places. In fact, Willowdale early childhood education centre, which the minister visited, has 900 children on the waiting list. Many of these families will now be able to access care as our early childhood education plan rolls out.

We know there are still issues, and the government is attempting to address these with the education of early childhood educators, providing fee-free TAFE places for people doing early childhood education and providing more spaces in universities for early childhood education degrees. We recognise that there are still issues, and we must do more to attract, retain and support the early childhood workforce. That's why we're investing over $70 million to support the skills and training of the quality and sustainable early childhood education and care sector. This important investment will support the quality of the highly trained early childhood education and care workforce and improve access to professional development to make it easier for educators to progress their careers. I'm proud of being a part of a government that's doing this, and I look forward to the many advance that will continue to be made in the future under this government.

Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party, Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those on the other side of the chamber should be ashamed of themselves that their cabinet ministers are not here in attendance today. Under the last coalition government, cabinet ministers—the education minister was in this chamber for consideration in detail. It shows the arrogance and hubris coming out of the Albanese government that those cabinet ministers are not here for the consideration in detail before us as well. It's an absolute disgrace.

It's been 12 months since the Albanese government came to power. Unlike the Prime Minister's repeated promises, I haven't actually met an Australian—especially in my electorate of Moncrieff, on the Gold Coast—who is better off under this government. They keep saying it, but it's not actually true. Electricity bills have skyrocketed. Grocery and petrol costs have increased substantially. The cost of sending your children to early childhood education has increased. We just heard a bit of a spray there from the member for Macarthur. He's talking about how children have equal access and how there are 900 children on a waiting list in one centre. That's right: waiting lists are growing around the country. I have centres in my own electorate where there are waiting lists of 400 children.

Coming out of Melbourne now is news that Victorian families are being turned away from child care because of critical staff shortages, with demand for spots higher than ever. A survey has found two-thirds of centres had to cap placements earlier this year. Centres are actually capping their placements and their enrolments. What is coming out of this Albanese government about early childhood education is simply not what's happening across the sector. The last time Labor was in government, the fees increased by 53 per cent in just six years. Out-of-pocket costs have already increased in the last six months—that's half the time they've been in government—by 6.5 per cent. We're seeing this increase all the time. This means their lack of management of inflation has now put at risk the $4.7 billion bill that they put forward for cheaper childcare for families across the nation. That will not come to fruition, because it will all be wasted. Centres will put their prices up, which we're seeing, and cap their enrolments because they don't have the educators. Families will lose that subsidy. If you're a family living in a thin market or a childcare desert, stuck on a waiting list, with no early learning centre in your area, you'll be in exactly the same position come 1 July. I asked the minister: will you commit to Australian families that fees will not increase and that children actually will be able to have access in regional and remote areas in particular around the country?

The government have no idea what they're doing. They have no real plan when it comes to the early childhood education sector. We can see that from their 2023-24 budget, which contained pretty much rats and mice for the sector and nothing to address the increasing number of concerns that are being raised weekly with me. Sure, there's a $72.4 million package for educators to receive training, but it's for only 80,000 places. There are over 200,000 educators in the sector right now and, as I meet with them and have roundtables across each of the states, they're telling me that they're under great pressure. It will basically be a lucky dip for who gets to undertake further training and who doesn't. It's a bit of a slap in the face for educators who work tirelessly to look after our children.

If the government is so committed to supporting educators—and we know they love to use them when they stand up at a centre every other day for those media opportunities, always in the cities, never in the regions, possibly because there's such a lack of infrastructure that there's nowhere to go to do a presser on early childhood education. They need to start building some centres in some of the areas.

While we're on this topic: given there's such a shortage of educators in the sector, how are centres going to be able to backfill and allow their staff to go participate in training? Where are they going to get the staff to do that? They won't be able to get them. This package promises opportunity, but, with the workforce to backfill, educators will simply be stuck—especially those, as I said, living in regional and rural communities where there are no educators to spare, because Labor simply don't care about regional Australia. They don't care about remote Australia. There will not be one extra new place in regional and remote Australia for families that need to put their children into early childhood education. Those on the other side have always failed to understand that regional communities are the backbone of this country.

I have a few more questions. What about families who don't work the traditional nine-to-five hours? What are they going to do for those families? What is the government doing for them? Minister, I ask you what the government is doing for families that cannot access— (Time expired)

Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor governments have the ability to transform people's lives for the better. I'm so proud to be standing here with the Minister for Early Childhood Education and to be talking about this bill, the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024.

We are a party that knows what women want. This is one of the reasons why the Albanese Labor government is investing in child care. This year, child care will get cheaper for close to 1.2 million families across Australia through the childcare subsidy. This policy is great for parents, great for bubs and great for the economy. I'm proud that approximately 7,200 families in my electorate of Swan who are using the childcare scheme will benefit from this increased childcare subsidy. This is an issue that's close to my heart. It's something that was brought up many times when I was doorknocking with constituents during my campaign, and my own family is typical of other families in Swan.

Many people felt let down by the Morrison government. There was a comment about cabinet ministers not being here; at least I know who my cabinet ministers are. Many people felt let down by the Morrison government and that childcare costs exploded under their watch. Those opposite frequently cite the cost of living. However, during the former government, when inflation averaged just two per cent per year, childcare fees increased by an astounding 49 per cent. This was a huge cost to young families. This was pure mismanagement of the sector. In contrast, the Albanese Labor government is proposing changes to early childhood education which will save a family on combined income of about $120,000, about $1,700 in the first year of this plan alone.

This bill also aims to develop skills and increase the availability of qualified professionals in the field of early childhood education and care. What I was hearing from the other side is that it's not worth trying to train these educators. I think that they're worth it. They are investing in my child's future. It means that I can do my job. They are worth it. By investing in this crucial area, we will support growth of a highly skilled workforce—and the higher the skills, the better the quality—through greater access to training and professional development. This is something that happens in all childcare centres, but this is something that we can improve on. This initiative will make it more convenient for educators to advance their careers and improve the overall quality.

It will help retain our early childhood educators in the sector, too. Currently, this is an industry with very demanding work, and the truth is there is high staff turnover. When you look at high-performing teams, two things are ongoing feedback, but it's also training. You need to invest in training to have great-performing teams. We need to retain our educators. The Albanese Labor government is committed to improving the high standards of early childhood education by investing in this workforce and offering workers in the sector clear training pathways to grow and progress their careers.

Also, a large reason for the gender pay gap is a disparity in hours—the different hours worked between men and women. It's typically women who make the decision to leave their jobs or reduce their work hours, forgoing income, superannuation and career experience. This is an opportunity cost that deprives our nation of talent. It means that women are retiring with less superannuation. It means that women are, on average, earning less than their male counterparts in the same careers. It also adds to the unpaid care work that is disproportionately taken on by women.

The cost of child care drives many parents, typically mothers, away from the workforce. At the moment, approximately 60 per cent of mothers with young children work part-time hours. Some of this does relate to mums wanting to spend time with young children, but another part of this is cost. Cost is absolutely a barrier, particularly when deciding on how many days to return to work. Imagine what happens when you remove those barriers!

The Albanese Labor government is proud to be supportive of Australian women and help get them back in the workplace. I personally know how important this sector is. I could not do my job as an MP and as a mother without the amazing assistance of childcare educators—that includes in this place and also in the electorate of Swan. This is an investment into the future, and I commend the bill.

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like other speakers on this side, I am stunned that cabinet ministers have not been bothered to turn up for the consideration in detail debate. The member for Forrest and I have been here for a year or two, and I don't think she could ever recall an occasion where cabinet ministers were so arrogant and so full of hubris that they could not be bothered turning up for consideration in detail debates. I do thank the outer minister for attending—it's important she is here as well, with her childcare responsibilities—but it is extraordinary that cabinet ministers think they're too cool for school to come to an education debate where they might actually learn something from the other side.

We have a government, an opposition and a contest of ideas, and not all good ideas rest on one side of the chamber. It takes enormous arrogance and enormous hubris for one cabinet minister after another to decide they're too good to come to Federation Chamber and respond to a single question on issues like infrastructure or communications or education. Heaven forbid they might actually learn something from members on the other side, particular those with a lived experience in rural, regional and remote Australia, where the Labor Party is particularly weak. You have to acknowledge that, geographically, the domination of the Labor Party is in urban areas and some large provincial centres, but in terms of rural, regional and remote Australia, the Labor Party is spectacularly weak in terms of representation. For people like me, the member for Forrest and the member for Flynn, our lived experience in rural and regional and remote communities, particularly in relation to education, is something we would like to share with the minister and on which we would like to ask questions of the minister.

I want to ask questions of the minister, particularly in relation to the question of tertiary access for rural and regional students. It is an area where the member for Forrest and I have worked over our time in this place, with some degree of success and some improvements in terms of accessibility payments—tertiary access allowance and things like that. With the increased cost of living, and with the housing shortage particularly pronounced in many metropolitan areas, we are very concerned that the disproportionate number of regional students unable to attend university in our metropolitan areas will grow into the future. I want to know: has the minister got any measures, has he asked for any new measures, or has he explored any new measures in relation to addressing that imbalance in university participation rates? My electorate of Gippsland is one of the worst-performing areas in Victoria in terms of university participation rates, and part of the challenge is obviously aspirational. We, as local leaders in our community, have to build the aspiration in our kids, and keep working with them at a very early age to ensure they have that ambition, but there is also a challenge about accessibility and the costs of relocating to Melbourne when there's no other opportunity to attend those courses. I want to know if the minister has been meeting with the industry, or if he has asked his department to look at any other new measures that may assist with university participation rates for regional and rural students. Rural and regional students by any measure are underachieving when it comes to tertiary participation.

I acknowledge the minister responsible for early childhood education and child care is at the table. The focus taken by this side—and I think it's a good focus, particularly from a regional perspective—is around fairness, choice and flexibility. The accessibility argument is one the minister is well aware of—she is well aware of childcare deserts, like everyone in this place. From talking with young families in my community, my experience is they are looking for more flexibility to manage sometimes complex life challenges—they'll have a mixture of grandparent care, caring themselves and formal child care. The formal child care part of the equation is very important in rural and regional areas, and I'm sure the minister is aware of that. The government announced $18 million for communities to build new centres to address this issue; how many centres can be built with that $18 million, and how many of the families that I have been talking to in rural and regional areas around this issue are likely to benefit in the term of this government? Are we looking at a longer-term challenge here or are you thinking that there are going to be some improvements in the next couple of years? We have seen childcare centres forced to close their doors because they don't have the workforce—and I acknowledge the minister's comments earlier in relation to improving workforce training. But I'm very interested to know, from a rural and regional perspective, whether the minister genuinely believes we're going to see any change during this term of government on this challenge or whether there is going to be more focus on urban and peri-urban areas.

Again I must acknowledge that it is incredibly disappointing that we do not have cabinet ministers participating in this process. It's not unreasonable for them to put aside half an hour or an hour of their day, as the case may be, to respond to questions and be in this place to listen to the concerns of the opposition.

Jerome Laxale (Bennelong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I've just got to call out some of the opening statements from some of the previous speakers—the Manager of Opposition Business, the member for Moncrieff and the member for Gippsland. I think it's entirely appropriate that the Minister for Early Childhood Education is here, across not only her portfolio but that of the Minister for Education. We took a policy to the election. The member for Gippsland did stick to that policy a lot, but I understand why the other two members didn't want to talk about this policy to drive down the cost of child care across the country, because it's a good policy. To have the Minister for Early Childhood Education here, for one of the biggest election commitments of the Albanese government, estimated at $5 billion, which will transform our economy, is entirely appropriate. Shame on them for dragging her for turning up and doing her job.

I want to be specific. This policy, which none of you guys want to talk about, will help 1.2 million families across Australia. It will help 9,400 families in my electorate of Bennelong, which is the electorate with the second-highest number of families, I am told. That's 1,169 families in Epping and North Epping, 1,932 families in Ryde, 1,608 families in North, East and West Ryde, 868 families in Eastwood, 803 families in Ermington—and I could go on. From 1 July—and that's only 19 days away—these families will have access to more affordable early childhood education. That's because of the work of this government and the good work of the Minister for Early Childhood Education, so it's entirely appropriate that she is here.

We know that the advantages of affordable early childhood education are truly transformative. Not only does it empower children to embark on a journey of lifelong learning but it also gives parents the opportunity to work or study, to help earn a better wage and to make ends meet. This is only the first step. The Albanese Labor government is committed to creating a future where affordable, accessible and high-quality early education becomes a universal right. To achieve this vision, we have initiated two inquiries that delve deep into Australia's early childhood education system. Under those opposite, the prices skyrocketed. That's unsustainable. It's unsustainable for families and it's unsustainable for the sector. We know that access for everybody to early childhood education is critical. The first five years of a child's life are their formative years, and they set the foundation for future life outcomes, encompassing their learning, health and overall wellbeing. Research has proven this over and over—that children who participate in quality early learning programs experience improved educational outcomes, enhanced literacy and numeracy skills, higher school retention rates and greater success in their academic journey. That's why this policy is so important, because it will get more families and more kids into the early education system.

Recently I spoke to a local mum from Carlingford. Her name is Christina. Both of Christina's children have attended Midson Road Child Care Centre in my electorate of Bennelong, which I had the pleasure of visiting with the Minister for Early Childhood Education not so long ago. Christina told me about her experience as a full-time working parent of two boys and the benefit that access to early childhood education has had not just for her and her career but for her two children. Her two kids have attended child care and early education since they were three months old, which meant that Christine was able to get back to work whilst knowing that her children would be safe and cared for and that they would be learning in these facilities. Since attending Midson Road, her boys have had some great experiences, their favourites being excursions to the new Metro when it opened up—which is something I really enjoyed when it opened up, so it's for young and old—and meeting farmyard animals at school. For families like Christina's, more affordable early education means that they will get more money back into their household budgets right at a time when we know times are tough. This is a cost-of-living measure, as it also is a productivity and education measure, because we know this policy doesn't just benefit children; it is good for families.

Natalie Sard is a local who lives in West Ryde and she told me that her kids have benefited from early childhood education. Her kids are prepared for their school routines. They have had positive input into their emotional and behavioural development, and early childhood educators, who are just fantastic, have helped her kids develop self-regulation, empathy and problem-solving skills. For Natalie, cheaper child care means more money for necessities such as food, such as housing, such as education and health care. This is good policy, and I am not surprised that those opposite don't want to talk about it.

Minister, I would like to ask you: How will the Albanese Labor government's reforms make early learning more affordable and how will they benefit our economy?

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on these appropriation bills and specifically on the government's failure to provide adequate funding for schools. Like the member for Gippsland, I am disappointed to see that the education minister has not shown up here this evening, and that says a lot about his view about this particular portfolio. The government committed to fund public schools to 100 per cent of their SRS level, but budget papers reveal that this year will see a $756 million cut to government schools. If that is what a Labor commitment to public schools looks like after just one year, I shudder to think of what will happen to the rest of the education sector under this government.

This budget has gouged all funding where it has been needed the most, in the rural and regional areas like my electorate of Forrest and in remote and rural areas around the country. The budget has swept the rug from under the feet of some of our most vulnerable children. I want to draw attention to one area in particular, the Studio Schools program. This was a coalition funded program to build boarding schools for Indigenous children in the Northern Territory and in my home state of Western Australia. It was a fantastic initiative by the former government to lift attendance rates, increase achievement and attainment rates, provide a quality, safe and secure environment for Indigenous students and support local communities in their efforts to give the very best they could to their children. And what did the government do to this program? Well, it has cut the number of boarding facilities being built under this program from four to two, leaving over 150 children stranded. That is just deplorable.

Things are no different for Yipirinya School in the Northern Territory, which is still waiting for $8.3 million of promised funding, while the government spends $364 million on its referendum for the Voice. This $8.3 million of funding was provided for in the budget by the coalition government; however, this Albanese government, despite indicating to the country that they support Indigenous Australians and that they will do everything they can to improve the situation in Alice Springs, have not delivered that funding. The only time this government pays any attention to what is happening in Alice Springs is when the media runs a story and it detracts from its narrative.

The Minister for Education many times has said, 'I don't want to see us be a country where your chances in life depend on your postcode, your parents or the colour of your skin,' yet this budget, much like his first, shows that despite all of its promises, this government has no real commitment to education. It certainly has no real commitment to regional and remote Australia and no real commitment to Indigenous children. The fact is that after a whole year in power, this government has failed to deliver any meaningful reform for the education sector. The Australian people and our Australian children deserve better than a government which gives them nothing but broken promises, cuts to schools, cuts to the regions and cuts to Indigenous education. Instead of taking the initiative in this vital sector, the government is waiting for review after review to tell it what to do.

In regional electorates like mine and those that are more remote, schools are really struggling to recruit and retain teachers; we simply can't get them, and it certainly isn't for the lack of trying. My electorate is one of the fastest-growing, most diverse electorates in Australia with many opportunities to live, work, raise a family and retire. From Augusta to Busselton, Binningup and Donnybrook, it is a fabulous part of the world, yet like so many others we continue to have teacher shortages as a result of poor policy implementation from this federal Labor government. With wall-to-wall state Labor governments, there isn't anywhere here to hide.

When can we actually expect some real leadership from this government? When can we expect action on the pressing problems of teacher shortages, declining standards in schools and Indigenous access to education? I suspect we shall be waiting quite a long time for this. We are also seeing very exhausted teachers in our classrooms right now. They're working with a very overcrowded curriculum. I've had teachers say to me they've even asked their own principals if they could cut some of the out-of-school activities and school assemblies to allow them to simply teach the basic foundational skills that our children need the most.

Tracey Roberts (Pearce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In recognition of the importance of a child's early years to their health, wellbeing, education and future, the Albanese Labor government is supporting and funding measures that help parents maximise their learning opportunities in the crucial first five years. These early years are critical for lifelong learning, and we are funding a range of measures that will make a real difference, as they are the years that establish the foundation of a child's life, the building blocks.

Research shows that children who have access to quality early learning programs have better educational outcomes, including enhanced literacy and numeracy skills. Next month, we are increasing the childcare subsidy, meaning child care will be cheaper for around 1.2 million families, giving them access to the transformational benefits of early learning regardless of circumstances. This will have a flow-on impact which will enable more parents to work or study. This will help increase women's workforce participation by improving choice. It will also benefit businesses, who will find it easier to retain staff when employees have access to cheaper and more affordable child care. We know that there is more work to do, but there is an important step to take, and this is a very important first step.

Within my electorate of Pearce, the Lake Joondalup Early Learning Program is an example opportunity of community based, not-for-profit childcare services that focuses on early childhood development under the Early Years Learning Framework. I recently visited the centre with the Minister for Early Childhood Education, the member for Cowan. We understand the importance of early childhood. We saw the wonderful work of the caring and qualified staff. We saw for ourselves the effect that they have on the children. As the member for Cowan and I know, in the Pearce electorate, eight babies a day are born to families—eight babies a day—so the importance of early childhood is something that we are very interested in, and it's very important work.

The Lake Joondalup Early Learning Program was established 12 years ago and has a strong commitment to development and wellbeing outcomes for pre-kindy and additional-needs children in our communities. I was proud to show the minister, the member for Cowan, this fantastic centre, which sits on an acre of land and is surrounded by the natural world of plants, nature and animals. The centre is equipped with a specialised sensory room for children with learning difficulties that provides opportunities to build confidence, explore and develop different areas of the brain. It is clear that the children are thriving and their families are appreciative of the focus on the importance of early learning initiatives, especially for those with additional needs, including autism.

Children at a community centre like the Lake Joondalup Early Learning Program benefit from having a team of educators who are trained professionals with accredited degrees and experience in early childhood education and development. A paediatric nurse is also on staff, which is rare in childcare centres. What is also special about this centre is that it collaborates with speech and occupational therapists and other inclusion support specialists with their focus on being inclusive of all children, which is to be commended.

The Albanese Labor government is also looking ahead and is taking steps to consider how to build an affordable and accessible universal early education system that is high quality. We have two inquiries looking into Australia's early learning and childhood education system and have tasked the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to carry out an inquiry into early education and care sector prices. This will help build on our plan for a sustainable and accessible early childhood education sector, where no family or child is left behind.

From next month, these changes will deliver more affordable early childhood education and care for around 1.2 million families. Under the former government, childcare fees skyrocketed by 49 per cent. However, we are turning this around. The Albanese Labor government's changes mean that a family on a combined income of $120,000 with one child in care will save around $1,700 in the first year of this plan.

Our government is committed to supporting accessibility and affordability of early childhood care and education for First Nations children and their families. We are also recognising the vital job of early-learning educators and know that more must be done to attract, retain and support the workforce. That's why we are investing $72.4 million to support the skills and training of the early childhood education and care sector, to help build skills and strengthen the supply of qualified workers.

To the member for Cowan, our minister: I am sure that you agree that the Albanese Labor government is certainly committed to early childhood in our communities.

Zoe McKenzie (Flinders, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to add to this debate on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024 and the second May budget which it implements. Since the May budget, I have seen the impact of the last Labor budget on my constituents across Flinders and the pressure it's putting on them in terms of surging interest rates, unconstrained inflation and cost-of-living pressures.

In these conversations, however, parents have also expressed their concern that this government and its counterpart Labor government in Victoria are opposed to parents and students alike having choice in education. Choice, of course, is a fundamental tenet of Liberal philosophy and education policy. Parents and students and those who work in the education sector should be free and encouraged to choose the best teaching environment to suit their needs. I support all types of education—government and non-government alike. Both play an essential role, socially, economically and culturally, and both sectors deserve our support—different support, of course, reflecting the capacity of those to make private contributions to back up their choice, but some support, nonetheless, because all are taxpayers, and education is a critically important element in every Australian's life.

Today I will, however, focus on the budget's impact on the non-government and independent school sector. Many schools in that sector are low-fee, in terms of their fees for their students, and located in under-served parts of our community. They have, nevertheless, been hit hard by aspects of Labor's budget. Based on rigorous analysis through the Senate estimates process, it would appear that this budget cut $756 million from government schools, regional education and Indigenous schools. This came as a surprise to parents who were not warned in the lead-up to last year's federal election that their choices would go unsupported by this government.

In the place of clear and careful education policy, this government has commissioned a raft of reviews: a review of childcare, a review of schools, a review of universities. How many reviews does the government need to tell it what to do about the education sector?

When the coalition was in government, we delivered year upon year of meaningful reform in the education sector which upheld parental choice, increased funding to schools, increased access to child care and took the initiative on driving quality in higher education. Indeed, the coalition has been a long-term, active and arduous reformer across all levels of education—and I know, because I worked on many of them: the establishment of more than 20 Australian technical colleges, for example, in the mid-2000s; a dynamic and determined campaign to drive up trades apprenticeships; the shaping of training and particularly apprenticeships and traineeships around industry need; and the reform of Australia's higher education system to make it more diverse, with a stronger focus on quality teaching and impactful research.

This government, on the other hand, sits on its hands, watching as school standards plummet, teachers are buried under mountains of bureaucracy and parents despair as their children flounder in an overly complicated curriculum. In the 2023-24 budget, this government extended the current life of the National School Reform Agreement. However, it failed to commit the attached funding. So that means that, for many independent schools, as to the 2023 allocation of funds received through the NSRA, they now have to stretch those funds across another year up until 2025. Bureaucratic, impractical and frankly unfair decisions like this have tangible impacts on the quality of education students receive. The industry have told me that they have struggled with this change, as they were given very little notice of the fact that the funds for 2023 would have to stretch across two years. Most, if not all, of the funds had already been committed to programs in the current year. And some of the non-government representative bodies are expected to continue to provide services and support for reform initiatives—particularly to their lowest-fee members—despite not being funded to do so. This undermines the position and tenability of the non-government sector in the wider education landscape of Australia and it punishes parents for their choice and their sacrifice.

Throw this into this mix, of course: the Victorian Labor government has added salt to the wound by imposing payroll tax increases on non-government schools. No longer exempt from payroll tax, schools will, depending on the size of the fees they charge, be facing payroll tax bills of upwards of a million dollars in some instances. While the Premier has indicated that he may roll back some of this impost, the precise application is unclear. This will make life much harder for middle Australian families who want to provide their children with an education that suits their needs. Schools have told me that some will be paying more in payroll tax than they actually receive in state government funding. So let me repeat that: they will be paying more to the state government in payroll tax than they receive from the state government to undertake the necessary tasks of teaching and learning.

In a foray into fantasy and nonsense, this tax is even called the COVID-19 debt— (Time expired)

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Recently I had the pleasure of hosting the minister in my electorate of Lyons for the Tasmanian early years strategy round table. It was a great pleasure to have her there. These round tables, which are being held across the country, deliver on the government's commitment to develop an early years strategy, in consultation with the sector, families and service providers. The strategy focuses on our children's foundational early years, from zero to five, to optimise their lifetime wellbeing and counter the factors that are detrimental to their wellbeing across many areas. We know that if we get those vital first five years right we are able to change the trajectory of a child's life.

At the Tasmanian round table in Sorell, the minister and I heard from stakeholders their thoughts on what policy priorities should be included in the strategy and why. It was also a delight to host the minister at Tagari Lia in Bridgewater, as we visited stakeholders there. One of the key themes that emerged from this discussion was the need for greater support for the early childhood education workforce. In fact, just today the Mercury newspaper reported the results of the United Workers Union survey in which 73 per cent of the 4,000 respondents indicated that they planned to leave the sector within the next three years due to excessive workload and low pay—another legacy of the former government.

The Albanese Labor government knows that a supported, valued workforce is critical to making early childhood education and care more accessible and affordable for Australian families, so my question to the minister is: can the minister outline what support is available in the budget to attract, retain and support the early childhood workforce?

Anne Aly (Cowan, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank all of those who made a contribution this evening. You thought that the decade of waste was over. We've just had three shadow ministers squander an opportunity to actually participate in a consideration in detail debate. After all their bellowing about the minister not being here, neither the member for Bradfield nor the member for Moncrieff bothered to stay. I find it incredibly disrespectful that they spent the majority of their time belittling my position as the Minister for Early Childhood Education.

But I will go directly to points raised in the debate. The member for Bradfield mentioned Labor's track record in education, and rightly so, because Labor is the party of education. We have a very proud track record in education. In terms of the question raised about HELP debts, it is quite an act of hubris on the part of those opposite to come in here and talk about HELP debts when, under their leadership, Australian students paid more and had to pay their HELP debts earlier.

They also mentioned school funding. I'm pleased to inform the Federation Chamber that school funding has actually been increasing. For every student in government schools, it has been going up by seven per cent over the last year.

I want to go to the point that the member for Moncrieff made when she talked about our package on professional development, a question that was also asked by my colleague here, the member for Lyons. She said, 'This package offers opportunity.' She's right! I agree with her! The sector agrees with her! Educators agree with her! Teachers agree with her! If the member for Moncrieff were actually to talk to educators, teachers or anyone in the sector, she would know that. She would know that our professional development package, our package of professional development and paid practicum, is something that has been widely welcomed by the sector as a direct response to the workforce issues that we are very cognisant of.

To summarise the debate this evening, the Albanese Labor government is committed to a fair and equitable education system that benefits every single Australian, from birth through to school and right through to university. My colleague the Minister for Education has demonstrated that. I have demonstrated that in the portfolio of early childhood education and care, and our Prime Minister demonstrates that when he talks about an Australia where every person, no matter who they are, has an opportunity to get an education to tap into that transformative power of education. We have been in office for just over a year now, and in just over a year we have managed to do so much more for education than those of opposite did in 10 years. They want to come in here and ask us why we haven't done the school funding in 12 months—my apologies to the member opposite, the member for Kooyong. They had a decade in office to do it, and they didn't. They want to ask us what we are doing about rural and regional access to early childhood education and care. We have invested half a billion dollars in the CCC Fund, supporting 900 early childhood education and care services in rural and regional areas. We have made early childhood education and care more affordable for 1.2 million Australians, including 265,000 in rural and regional areas.

But they had a decade to fix these issues. They had a decade to build an education system that works now and into the future for every single Australian child, that takes every individual from zero right through to their university or post-school years, and they did nothing. They didn't do a single thing about it. We have demonstrated that in just over 12 months we have put education in the middle of our agenda because we know that a good education system is absolutely necessary for a fairer, a smarter and a more equitable country. We have laid the foundations for the future, and we will continue to do that through this term in government and through future terms in government because only Labor governments ever have a vision—a vision for education and a vision for opportunity for all Australians.

Proposed expenditure—$1,521,988,000 agreed to.

Debate adjourned.

Ordered that consideration in detail of the bill be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:33