Tony Zappia's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Jonceski, Mr Ljupco (Luch) | Condolences | House debates
Having listened to so many fine tributes to Ljupco Jonceski—or, as we all knew him, Luch—it's hard to add much more to what has already been said. I begin by making this observation:...
Having listened to so many fine tributes to Ljupco Jonceski—or, as we all knew him, Luch—it's hard to add much more to what has already been said. I begin by making this observation: it was absolutely wonderful to see Luch's family on the floor of Parliament House yesterday when the Prime Minister moved the condolence motion. For someone who had been so much a part of this House, who had spent so much of his life in this building—and, in particular, on the floor of parliament where few people ever get to step—I think it was not only appropriate but so good to see his family share in the space that took up so much of Luch's life. To them I extend my sincere condolences. Luch died too young, and I'm sure that the heartache of knowing that he died too young is something that they will have to try to work through over the years ahead. When I heard of Luch's passing, like so many others I couldn't believe it. I just thought, no, it can't be possible. Sometimes things seem to be what they are—I can recall on the very last day of last year when we were in this place, seeing Luch there and admiring him on that particular day for the way he conducted himself and for the way he worked within this building. When I reflected back on it later, I thought, 'I have been here for 18 years, but why did I think of him on that particular day in the way that I did?' Perhaps it was because, for some unknown reason, it was the last time I would see him. When I came back here after the break, and even now, I still don't find it real that he's not part of this building and that he's not one of the people that we see each and every day. When I was first elected in 2007 and came here, Luch was the first attendant I got to know. He was the one that you might say I was introduced to as one of the attendants of this place. From that very first moment, he made me feel welcome and he made me feel supported. For a new member, it's pretty important to know that you feel that you've just made a friend that knows this place and is going to be there for you when you need that support. It's incredibly important. Over time, you build up relationships with so many other people, but he was the very first person I can actually recall. Others have spoken of the way he was able to support people in this room, regardless of which side of politics they came from, and to do so in such a professional way that everyone felt treated—as others have quite rightly said—equally. And they were treated equally; he didn't differentiate and he tried to support people in every way he could. One of the things I did notice about Luch was that he got to know the procedures and processes of this place so well, and he was a stickler for procedure. I could see that in the way he would talk to his other attendants, making sure that things were done right according to the rules and conventions of this place. He did that and I admire him for it. The credibility of this place all comes down to the way we all conduct ourselves and the processes which we adhere to and which, in turn, give legal standing to everything we do. Luch wanted to make sure that was done properly, and he always did. As we all know, the role of politicians is not always easy, and there are indeed stresses that we all face each and every day. As so many other members have pointed out, Luch could read people. He could read the floor of parliament and he could read when he perhaps needed to do that little bit extra that others might not have picked up on but Luch had. With respect to his work here, I have to say that it is something that has touched each and every one of us, because he touched each and every one of us in a very, very personal way. He reflects and embodies what I believe is the spirit of all of the staff that work in this building—whether it's the attendants, whether it's all the other staff that we see in Parliament House—who, equally, are nonpartisan and don't treat anyone differently but collectively make our role work as well as it does and give us the support that they do. I suspect that Luch, even among the attendants and the other staff, set an example for others to follow, which is something that we should also appreciate. I thank him for his personal support, but I also thank him for being the role model he became as an attendant in this place. As others have said, and as the last speaker—the member for Riverina—quite rightly pointed out, it's not usual that we honour someone that hasn't been a statesman of some sort, yet here we are, honouring and remembering Luch, because he did touch our lives. I say to Luch: thank you for your support during my time here. It's greatly appreciated, as I'm sure it is for all the others. May you rest in peace. Just while I'm on my feet, I will also take the opportunity to recognise Malcolm Balcarek. Malcolm, who also passed away only recently, was one of the small team of Comcar drivers in Adelaide. Malcolm's funeral, I believe, is tomorrow. Like Luch, Malcolm was one of those people upon whom we rely each and every day who do such a wonderful service—unassuming and always there supporting. Again, I simply want to say thank you to Malcolm and offer my condolences to his family.
Bolkus, Hon. Nick | Condolences | House debates
I'll begin my remarks by extending my condolences to Nick Bolkus's wife, Mary; to his children Aria, Mikayla and Nicholas; and to his sister, Anna. When you're speaking last on a condolence...
I'll begin my remarks by extending my condolences to Nick Bolkus's wife, Mary; to his children Aria, Mikayla and Nicholas; and to his sister, Anna. When you're speaking last on a condolence motion, there's not much left to be said, especially having listened to the contributions of all my colleagues here in this place over the last day or two, where I believe that they all have beautifully summed up Nick's life. I wasn't able to get to the funeral service for Nick at the Greek Orthodox Church, otherwise known as the Cathedral of Archangels Michael and Gabriel, in Adelaide on 21 January, because parliament here was sitting, but I was able to get to the state memorial on 22 January at the Allan Scott Auditorium in the Hawke Building at the University of Adelaide. Again, the collective contributions there on the day, beginning with Daniela Ritorto, Premier Peter Malinauskas, former deputy premier John Rau, Mary, Aria and Mikayla, and the Minister for Health, Disability and Ageing's contribution in this chamber yesterday, I believe perfectly encapsulate the life of Nick Bolkus and the person he was—the husband, the father, the friend, the politician and the community man that so many others have spoken about in their contributions about him. The number of people who were at the Allan Scott Auditorium state memorial service also provided a glimpse of the respect that Nick was held in by people from across the country. The number and diversity of people who had come to know him and the impact that he had had on their lives were well displayed on the day by the presence of those people. I first met Nick Bolkus shortly after the dismissal of the Whitlam government, when I took a job working as research officer to Senator Jim Cavanagh. Nick was then working for Clyde Cameron. The federal MPs and senators at the time predominantly worked on the 15th floor of the AMP building, which was located directly across the road from the state parliament house. The senators and members had their offices up there, but the staff of the federal representatives were located in a shared room where I, Nick, Paul Holloway and Malcolm Dixon also worked—Paul working for Ralph Jacobi, the then member for Hawker, Malcolm Dixon working for Senator Reg Bishop and Nick, as I said, working for Clyde Cameron. Within that shared space there was a private office. Unsurprisingly, Nick Bolkus took the private office—he was the most senior of all of us at the time. He took the office, and I'd still see him every day as we worked, effectively, alongside each other. What was noticeable was that Nick didn't seem to do a lot of work as a research officer but, in fact, spent most of his time networking with people within the political system and outside of it—building relationships with MPs, community leaders and business people and with whomever else he was able to. In fact, it would be fair to say that I can rarely recall Nick without the phone glued to his ear, such was his interest in trying to make connections with people in and around the state, and interstate as well. At the time, whilst he was a young person, every Friday the MPs would come back from Canberra—people like Reg Bishop, Jim Toohey, Mick Young and, sometimes, Senator Don Cameron, Clyde's brother, and state members Jack Wright and Geoff Virgo, who were considered to be some of the more influential MPs of the day, and my friend the member for Adelaide would probably remember many of those MPs—and would gather for lunch at one place or another, and I'm pretty sure that, at those lunch meetings, they would try to sort out the issues of the country and the internal issues of the Labor Party. Chinatown and Hindley Street were popular venues. It was interesting that Nick was already embraced by that group so early in the piece. My view is that they embraced him because they saw the qualities in him that would make him a future leader, and they were absolutely right. They backed him, and he ended up as a senator in this place in 1981, after having been elected in the 1980 election. In 1981 Senator Jim Cavanagh, who I worked for, retired, so my connection with Nick became somewhat more distant after that. He was elected to the Senate. I went back into my own private life and so on. But we always kept in touch. It wasn't until pretty much the time that I got elected to this place that we once again came together, you might say, and regularly contacted each other over a whole range of matters. The interesting thing about Nick's career is that he went on to be a minister and—again, as the member for Adelaide pointed out—the first Greek person to become a cabinet minister, which, in its own right, was a huge achievement. But he was someone who was absolutely committed to policy work. I'm pleased that the Minister for Home Affairs, in his remarks before they were cut short, touched on his contribution to Indigenous land rights and, in particular, the debate that took place after the Mabo decision in the High Court where legislation was brought into the parliament, and, subsequently, the debate in terms of amendments to land rights when the Howard government took office. As someone who had taken an interest in land rights—because former senator Jim Cavanagh, who I worked for, was in fact the first minister to bring legislation relating to land rights into this parliament—I listened with interest to the very long debate that took place when Labor was in opposition and there were amendments to the land rights act. Yes, it was a long debate, but, again, Nick Bolkus played a leading role in that debate—as he did in the debate under Paul Keating when Labor introduced legislation following the Mabo decision. It's one of the achievements of Nick that has not been given, I believe, sufficient airing or sufficient credit for. Whilst we talk about multiculturalism and his contribution to that, which I entirely agree with and I concur with all the remarks that have been made about that, he also contributed immensely to the Indigenous land rights issues in this country, and that shouldn't be overlooked, because it did set a precedent and a pathway for Indigenous land ownership that we still have to this day. When he left politics, I would occasionally catch up with Nick, and, again, his interest in politics never waned—not only his interest, but, quite frankly, he was someone who could read the political winds so well. He was someone that you would take advice from because you knew that he understood politics and he understood what the likely consequences of different decisions were. It was always a pleasure to catch up with him to hear his insights into what might lie ahead, and we would do that quite regularly. In fact, when I had Lindsay Tanner, who was the finance minister after my election to this place in 2007, come out to my electorate to do a community forum, I had Nick as the emcee—again, because of his interest in politics, his ability to perhaps elicit the right questions that the public might want to hear and the people that were attending might want to hear and also his ability to be able to contribute to the forum responses that there might be. Lindsay was so well known and it was great to have the two of them there together, because they had both worked with each other and knew each other, and it was an asset for me to have both of them there. Subsequent to that, as I said, I'd kept in touch with him, but, in later years, Nick's health started to decline. When he went into the nursing home in 2019, I would visit him. Regrettably, because of COVID, the visits had to be stopped for a while. But, once the restrictions were lifted, I'd still go back and visit him, and I watched him deteriorate physically over that time. I'd take him outside of the centre, and we'd go down to the local shopping centre nearby. I'd take him down there for a coffee, and we would again talk politics. And, even though he was physically almost unable to feed himself or drink his coffee, his mind was as sharp as it was the day I met him. Again, he was someone that you could ask for advice about what was likely to happen. He could read the political winds, as I said earlier, and that never left him. In his time here, at this place, I know that he developed friendships with a lot of MPs—I'm talking about friendships that were life lasting—and it was so good to see people, at the memorial service, like Laurie Brereton, Warren Snowdon and Brendan O'Connor come along. Nick, when he was reminiscing about his time in this place with me, would often mention them as being partners in whatever else he was doing. The late Simon Crean was another person—and I know Simon would've been there had it not been for the fact that he couldn't be there, because he had passed away—that I know Nick would speak so highly of. Everything's been said about his contribution to public life and the examples of the people that he has helped, and I'm not going to go over all of that. But I say this about him: he was a person who, like all of us, came into this place wanting to make a difference, and he did. He made a difference in this place. He made a difference back in South Australia in particular, where he was an influential leader within the Labor Party. He made a difference within his own Greek community; the member for Adelaide referred to his international contacts and so on. And he made a difference to people's lives, including people overseas—and again there were examples given of that. He did so always committed to, and always being a true believer and a faithful member of, the Labor Party. Even when he left this place—and he didn't leave under his own decision—he never turned his back on the Labor Party or the people that he had got to know over the years. I'll finish with this observation about Nick: I knew him for most of my life, and in all that time I can never once recall him raising his voice—not once; not within the chamber and not outside of the chamber. He was always quietly spoken, very placid and very considered in everything he said. So to Nick I say: Nick, thank you for your leadership. Thank you for your friendship. Thank you for what you did for the people of Australia. May you rest in peace. Debate adjourned.
Middle East | Constituency Statements | House debates
At the ecumenical worship service for the opening of the 2026 federal parliamentary year, there was a call for peace throughout the world. Every day, billions of people struggle through life...
At the ecumenical worship service for the opening of the 2026 federal parliamentary year, there was a call for peace throughout the world. Every day, billions of people struggle through life living in extreme poverty, violent conflict, war and oppression, none more so than the Palestinians, who have never known peace in their lifetime and who only know a life of daily survival and misery. With so much else going on in people's lives here in Australia and overseas, and with people tiring of the decades-old Palestine-Israel conflict, the daily sufferings endured by Palestinians hardly rate a mention in mainstream media here in Australia. That has been even more noticeable since the announcement of a ceasefire in October, when, for most outsiders, the conflict was supposedly settled. Yet the shootings, the bombings, the air strikes and the suffering did not stop with the announced ceasefire. Credible sources report that, since the ceasefire, over 500 Palestinians, including innocent women and children, have been violently killed. The Israeli land grab continues. Journalists are barred from the region in an attempt to prevent the truth from being reported. International aid to desperate and starving Palestinians is restricted by the Israeli military. And even with the recent opening of the Rafah crossing to Egypt, on-the-ground reports claim that very little aid is now getting through. Aid workers who risked their lives to save people are pleading for international intervention to force the Netanyahu government to ease their restrictions over Palestinian people, and now the Jewish Independent reports that the Israeli Knesset is considering legislation that would make the death sentence mandatory for intentional killing by Palestinians, but not by Israelis. Since October 2023, around 72,000 Palestinians, including over 20,000 children, 1,700 health workers and 259 journalists and media workers, have been killed; 182,000 people have been wounded; 870,000 have been displaced; and 10,000 Palestinians have been taken prisoner. Whilst some will dispute those statistics, credible reports, including from aid workers and UN observers on the ground, who have addressed MPs in this place, confirm that the situation for Palestinians is horrific and their ongoing oppression and the widespread loss of life is very real. Yet the world turns a blind eye whilst Palestinians lose their lives, their homes, their lands and their rights. Accusations of war crimes, ethnic cleansing, apartheid and genocide against the Netanyahu government are now regularly raised with me. History will judge this period harshly, but that will be of no use to the desperate Palestinian people, who, right now, are pleading for help as they struggle to survive. For them, peace is an elusive dream.
Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It's a pleasure to follow the member for Richmond. Having heard her contribution and how well she summarised the importance of this legislation, the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of...
It's a pleasure to follow the member for Richmond. Having heard her contribution and how well she summarised the importance of this legislation, the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025, I feel she's left me with very little else to say! I commence my own remarks by thanking the nurses in our health workforce—over 400,000 of them across the country, and, as the member for Richmond quite rightly pointed out, the most evenly spread and the largest health force sector we have in the country. Every day they provide patient care that is second to none in terms of the relationships they build with patients, the confidence they give them, and the counselling and support they give them to get through, in many cases, very difficult health issues. It's not surprising that, given the work they do, they are probably rated as the most trusted profession across all professions in the country. That says a lot about the confidence the community has in nurses. That is not surprising when you think about the work they do, dealing each and every day with sometimes incredibly difficult situations—dealing with patients that have got very serious injuries, horrific injuries at times. They have to face that on a regular basis, whether it's drug-affected people or people with serious disability or even dementia; they're dealing with people who don't know what they're doing, and it's incredibly difficult and draining work. In particular, it can also be very risky work. I note that this year marks the 10th anniversary of the murder of South Australian nurse Gayle Woodford, in the outback in South Australia. I well remember that incident. That highlights the work nurses do and the risks they often take. I'm pleased to say that, as a result of what happened to Gayle, the laws were changed to try and provide a little bit more support and security for our nurses at the time. Australia's health system is indeed one of the best in the world; again, we can attribute much of that to the work of the nurses and what they do. But even though it is a good health system here in Australia—and I think that would be widely accepted and recognised—the reality is it is under stress. We have an ageing population and a shortage of health professionals right across the health profession spectrum. Trying to fix that is not something we can do overnight, because, in each case, health professionals need years of training in order to do the work they do. The fact the sector is under stress is not good for patients, because at times they can't get in to see their GP or the health professional they need. Nor is it good for the health workforce themselves, who are put under incredible pressure and often have to work long hours in order to try and fit in demands from the patients that want to see them. Neither side wins unless we can fix the system. Whilst it is something that will take time to fix, there are things we can do right now that will make a difference. The Minister for Health and Ageing, since his appointment as health minister, has been methodically working through the steps we need to take in order to bring the health system back to the level at which we would all like to see it. Empowering nurses to prescribe medications is one of those things we can do right now and are doing right now; I commend everyone who was involved in that decision and, having made that decision, bringing it to the House in the form of this legislation. Not only do nurses have, in my view, the professional qualifications and, as I said earlier on, the confidence of the community to do what they do; their daily experience in dealing with the patients they deal with each and every day matters. It's sometimes the experience of being in the job that teaches you more than any academic training you get in universities. Whilst they are out there every day doing the work they do, they're learning on the job each and every day, which, in my view, makes them thoroughly accredited to prescribe and give medications to their patients. They know what will work as well as anybody else. They know what a patient needs when they see a patient as well as anybody else. Whilst this legislation does bring in some additional appropriate safeguards to ensure that nurses get additional training and oversight by a health professional working with them, it enables them to do what they know needs to be done—that is, when a patient needs certain medication, they are able to prescribe it for them. In doing that, there are an enormous number of benefits. Firstly, the patient benefits because the patient gets immediate access to what they need. Secondly, it takes pressure off the health system because the patient doesn't have to wait for a doctor to come in—a doctor who may also be working long hours and unable to get there when the patient does. So it takes pressure off the doctor or the GP or whatever other health professional might have been called in. It also takes pressure off our emergency departments in our hospitals. For example, quite often people in aged care, where we now have registered nurses on duty 24 hours a day, need medical assistance. If the aged care premises can't get a doctor—and many doctors are not able to attend—then people are simply sent to the nearest hospital. That ties up medical staff at the hospital, and it ties up hospital beds as well. Having a nurse able to prescribe the medication that the patient needs will relieve an enormous amount of pressure on a whole range of different people within the health network more broadly. It also means that, for people in remote and rural areas—which is where nurses play a particularly important role—there will be additional services. When you go into remote and rural areas, the chances of finding a doctor are very, very difficult; in fact, those are some of the areas where we have the least number of doctors. What we do have across the country is nurses in those places. Those nurses provide literally all the medical care that people need because there's no-one else. Again, enabling them to be able to prescribe medications is critical to them being able to do their job and to do it well for the patient. Apart from the fact that there are no doctors, the reality is that, for many of those people, travelling to the nearest centre where there is a GP practice or a hospital is sometimes impossible. In remote areas, travel isn't easy, and, even if people can get to a centre, it is costly. So this will save people both money and time. That is indeed a good thing. As I said earlier, these decisions are not made flippantly. There is a process in place whereby nurses will get additional training. I understand that the first cohort of nurses providing prescriptions will be able to do so from 1 July. There is oversight. As I said earlier, they are working in partnership with an authorised health professional. These are some of the security measures that have been implemented as part of this legislation, and they are responsible measures. The nurses themselves, even before they get to this step, have had to show a level of experience within the workforce. I think they have had to have been a registered nurse for at least three years. So they're already experienced people, but that additional training and oversight ensures that there aren't any risks being taken. I'm going to close with perhaps what all other speakers on this side of the House have closed with. This is another step in trying to reform our health system in this country. It is a health system that—as I have said from the outset—is good but can be better. We are getting there one step at a time. The 122 urgent Medicare clinics that have been opened across the country and the 15 clinics that are about to open will make a difference as well. The workforce is growing thanks to this government. We are slowly getting more doctors into the system. I understand that some 17,000 have been added in the last two years. We've tripled the GP bulk-billing incentive for pensioners, concession cardholders and kids, and since November that has been expanded to all Australians. The proportion of bulk-billing has risen from around 20 per cent in 2025 to now 40 per cent. We have literally doubled the number of GP practices that are now bulk-billing. That's all because we've tripled the incentive. As has been said time and time again, the price of PBS medicines has been reduced to $25. For concession card holders, the price will be $7.70 right through to the end of this century. The most recent hospital agreement means record funding for our hospitals. I close with this comment: there's probably nothing more important to families than good health. Particularly when someone is unwell, there is nothing else that matters in their life other than their health because, without their health, they literally have nothing, so the health system does matter to people. We have a good health system. This is going to make it better. I commend this legislation to the House.
Bondi Beach Attack Victims | Condolences | House debates
To the families and loved ones of the people killed at Bondi on 14 December, I extend my profound condolences. I can only try to understand their grief and their loss. It has now been over a...
To the families and loved ones of the people killed at Bondi on 14 December, I extend my profound condolences. I can only try to understand their grief and their loss. It has now been over a month since the Bondi Beach shootings. Time moves on so quickly, and, for most people, normal life resumes. But it doesn't for those killed at Bondi, nor for their families and close friends—15 people that were celebrating life, probably looking forward to the summer holidays and Christmas plans that never came to pass. For their families and close friends, and for those wounded, their lives were changed forever, left with heartache and memories that will never leave them. On 14 December our nation was left shocked, angry, saddened and grieving in a way I have never seen before: angry at those who committed such a cowardly and heartless act; shocked that such an event could happen in Australia, where the principle of a fair go is ingrained in our identity and where we pride ourselves on multicultural success; saddened and grieving that 15 defenceless people—including 10-year-old Matilda—who had done no harm to their killers and were going about their lives as we all do could be mercilessly gunned down. We cannot turn back time, we cannot bring back the lives of those killed and we cannot restore the lives of their loved ones. But we can, and we do, thank those who in any way assisted on the day—some risking or losing their own lives, as so many other speakers have noted. Today there is too much hate throughout the world—too many innocent lives lost every day because of hate, bigotry, greed, and racial and religious intolerance. Hate and bigotry are used by evil people to indoctrinate others, who then commit vile atrocities even at the cost of their own lives. Jewish people know hate and bigotry only too well, having experienced antisemitism for centuries. The Bard, William Shakespeare, wrote about it over 400 years ago in his play The Merchant of Venice. In act 3, scene 1, Shylock, a hated Jewish moneylender and a victim of antisemitism, when questioning why Jewish people were so despised, exclaims: I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer … He goes on: If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? That passage reminds us all that we all have much more in common than that which divides us, yet, 400 years later, nothing has changed. Every life is precious, every life is sacred and every life matters. Laws may constrain behaviour, but they will not restrain a crazed person who is prepared to die for their cause. It is only when people overcome hatred and bigotry that others will feel safe. And people are not born with hate in their mind. It is taught to them. And, just as hate is taught to them, so can love be. We must not let the Bondi killings slowly fade into the past. We owe it to the Jewish community, who have already endured so much, and we owe it to the 15 people killed and to their families to do all that is possible to prevent another tragedy. May the loss of their lives not be in vain but become a time of reflection and a turning point for the better for our nation.
Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I speak in support of the Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025. Over recent years there's been a lot of misinformation about migration. Some of it has just been through...
I speak in support of the Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025. Over recent years there's been a lot of misinformation about migration. Some of it has just been through misunderstandings, but much of it has been deliberate, intended to sow division within communities, to score cheap political points or to divert attention away from the real issues that are causing social struggles. The fact is that migration has been critical to Australia's development, and this has been particularly so since World War II. In the years since then, there has been an influx of migrants. Immediately after World War II, we saw a huge number of British and European migrants come to this country. In the decades that followed, that changed, with people coming here from many other parts of the world. The reality is that today we often speak of Australia as being a successful multicultural country, with, indeed, almost every country in the world being represented by people who now live here. In the past four decades, under Labor and coalition governments, we have seen, I understand, some seven million or more people come and permanently settle in Australia. Yet I accept that Australians want a controlled immigration program. They want an immigration program that serves Australia's needs and that they can have confidence in. Importantly, they want an immigration program that is not rorted, yet that is what has been happening over recent years, during which, because of widespread conflict overseas, desperate people fleeing war or persecution have been prepared to do whatever it takes to come to Australia. These are, indeed, vulnerable people who are then taken advantage of by, sometimes, people smugglers who put them through life-threatening journeys, and if they do manage to reach Australia, they then are often taken advantage of by employers or job recruiters. Often people of their own culture are those very job recruiters—people who promise them work on the basis that they can secure employment for them but who then exploit them in the process. If I get time, I'll talk a bit more about that later on. In 2016, the coalition government established the Migrant Workers' Taskforce, and I commend them for doing so. They established that taskforce in response to revelations of serious migrant worker exploitation. An inquiry was then held, chaired by Professor Alan Fels AO, with Deputy Chair David Cousins AM. The findings of that inquiry were released in the Report of the Migrant Workers' Taskforce in March 2019. A paper released by Australia Policy Online, which I believe articulates what the real issue was so well, had this to say in comment on the taskforce report: Wage exploitation is of great concern to the Australian community. It is damaging to Australia's reputation and may lead to negative flow-on effects to the proper functioning of the labour market and the economy. It is unfair not only to migrant workers, but also to other employees who are undercut on wages and job opportunities, and law abiding employers trying to compete on price. Australia prides itself on being a country where the principle of fairness underpins our economic and social relationships. However, migrant worker exploitation is a direct repudiation of this. … … … Migrant workers who are in Australia on a temporary basis may have poor knowledge of their workplace rights, are young and inexperienced, may have low English language proficiency and try to fit in with cultural norms and expectations of other people from their home countries. These factors combine to make them particularly vulnerable to unscrupulous practices at work … Fears about the consequences of approaching government agencies are common among migrants from less democratic countries than our own. The paper says a lot more, of course, but I think those sentiments sum up what the issue is and what we are responding to today—that people have indeed been exploited for much too long. That exploitation can take the form of underpaying wages; forcing workers to work extended unpaid hours; threatening to cancel a worker's visa if they complain or raise concerns about their work conditions; coercing workers to hand over their passport, as the member for Adelaide referred to earlier; forcing workers to work in unsafe or poor health and safety conditions; cramming workers into inadequate housing; and even physical threats. In June, a parliamentary inquiry in New South Wales heard from a GP in Wagga Wagga that hundreds of women were 'seeking abortions that they would not normally want' in order to keep their work visas. That is the extent to which the exploitation seems to have manifested itself. It is because of those concerns that we have this legislation. The taskforce I referred to earlier, commissioned by the last coalition government, found issues that I believe were widely known throughout the community—issues that I think everyone in the chamber would have come across at some stage or another. The number of worker exploitation cases that have been exposed over the years is a matter that should be of concern to this parliament. The taskforce provided 22 recommendations in their report; yet, three years later, the last coalition government had done nothing with them. It commissioned a report and then just sat on it, as it did with Graeme Samuel's review into the EPBC Act. It seems that the last coalition government was very good at kicking the can down the road on these important issues by commissioning reports that would obviously delay any response from the government, and then, once they'd received them, did nothing. Once again, it is up to Labor to fix the problem, and that is what this legislation does. This legislation sets up a register of approved work sponsors. In doing so, it will provide transparency, accountability, and enhanced protections for temporary skilled migrants. It will also support temporary skilled migrant workers who need to find a new sponsor if that need arises. And, as other speakers have made absolutely clear, this legislation arises after extensive consultation—consultation by the previous coalition government and then by the Albanese Labor government; consultation that went far and wide throughout the community and included community groups, business, and so on. This legislation goes a long way towards stamping out some of the problems I referred to earlier. It may not fix every problem, but it's a start in the right direction. I have no doubt that worker exploitation will continue. In fact, worker exploitation isn't simply limited to skilled migrants who come from overseas; it occurs on a regular basis in many other sectors. However, the fact remains that skilled migrants make up the largest cohort of migrants to Australia. We face skilled workforce shortages again because the last coalition government did nothing about training up Australians. Instead, they decimated TAFE while simultaneously paying huge sums to shonky training organisations. The Albanese Labor government is fixing that as well, with free TAFE training. But, logically, it will take some time before those trainees are work ready. I understand that, to date, over 725,000 people have enrolled in free TAFE courses. I commend them for doing so, and I look forward to them filling those skill shortages for which we're currently having to find people from overseas. In the interim, however, we do have a skilled workforce shortage, which must be met. If it's not met, then the whole community will suffer. If we don't bring in skilled tradespeople, we can't build the very houses that everybody is screaming out for at the rate at which they need to be built. If we don't bring in skilled tradespeople or skilled professionals from overseas we won't be able to fill the health and medical workforce shortages that we're seeing right around the country, particularly in the country regions, where, I understand, that, if it weren't for the skilled professionals that we are bringing in from overseas, there would be communities without doctors and nurses. Look at the aged-care sector. Again, if it weren't for the skilled people coming in from overseas, it is very likely that many of those centres would be unable to operate and the vulnerable older people that we have in this country who are looking for aged care would not be able to get it. On one hand we have a real need that must be met, and on the other hand we have a shortage of the skills that are required to provide the services that people need. We need to find a way of fixing that that is appropriate in terms of both meeting our migration statistics and our migration intake and ensuring that those people who come into this country are then given work and paid accordingly and are not in any way abused as people have been on so many occasions. In concluding my remarks, I'll make this point. Worker exploitation is, as I said earlier, not just isolated to migrant workers; it occurs across the board. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that migrant workers who come here are exploited much more so than others. I used some examples earlier on of why that is the case, but I'll simply make this point. Imagine someone fleeing a war-torn country under circumstances in which they risk their lives and then reaching Australia. They would do anything they need to do in order to stay here, not only to protect their own life but also to be able to earn a few dollars so they can then send that back to family members who they left in their home country. These are vulnerable people who are at the mercy of unscrupulous operators, and we have seen example after example of that here in Australia. It is not to say that all employers are unscrupulous, but we need to ensure that those who are unscrupulous are no longer able to do what they are doing. I have heard the concerns from members opposite that this legislation goes too far and that too much information is going to have to be provided to authorities with respect to employers who take on migrant workers. I say to members opposite that those employers who are doing the right thing have nothing to fear. This legislation is no different to any other piece of legislation which regulates activities in this country or provides laws. Laws are always provided only in order to control the minority who do the wrong thing. If it weren't for the minority who do the wrong thing, we probably wouldn't need any laws whatsoever. This is simply another example of where the government need to act to protect vulnerable people as we have done in so many other areas of government policy. I commend this legislation to the House.
Petition: Light Pollution | Statements by Members | House debates
I present a petition with 12,144 signatures organised by the Australasian Dark Sky Alliance. The petition is calling for legislation to limit light pollution, specifically artificial light at...
I present a petition with 12,144 signatures organised by the Australasian Dark Sky Alliance. The petition is calling for legislation to limit light pollution, specifically artificial light at night. Light pollution has a number of negative consequences, which include ecological impacts on plants and animals, harming biodiversity; human health, especially sleep disruption; energy waste; and a reduction in the visibility of stars and planets, impacting astronomy. At present, there is a lack of comprehensive legislation to address light pollution and its impacts. I note that addressing light pollution does not mean forgoing useful lighting but rather going about it in a smarter way, which might include targeted lighting, choosing an appropriate intensity of lighting or eliminating unnecessary lighting. I'm advised that the petition has been considered by the Standing Committee on Petitions and found to be in order. This petition is timely as the International Union for Conservation of Nature's World Conservation Congress recently carried a motion on this very matter. I commend the Australasian Dark Sky Alliance for their efforts in raising a matter which I suspect many people are not aware of, and I draw the matter to the attention of the minister and to the attention of the House. The petition read as follows Light pollution caused by excessive Artificial Light at Night (ALAN) has harmful effects on human health, is harmful and disruptive to vulnerable species of flora and fauna, and has negative impacts on the economy, including placing unnecessary loads on electrical infrastructure, which leads to increases in greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Reducing ALAN not only helps to reduce the harmful effects listed above, but can also lead to benefits, such as making streets safer by reducing glare and light trespass, and increasing Astrotourism. We therefore ask the House to interduce legislation to limit light pollution and ALAN, including public and private exterior illumination, ensuring that lighting is only used when and where is it necessary, and is limited to levels which are safe and fit for purpose. Countries such as France, Germany and Croatia have already successfully introduced such legislation which limits light pollution and ALAN. from 12,144 citizens Petition received.
Mental Health | Private Members' Business | House debates
I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.
Public Works Joint Committee; Report | Committees | House debates
On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's report for 2025: Referrals made in July 2025. I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in...
On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's report for 2025: Referrals made in July 2025. I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report. Leave granted. This report is the fourth report of 2025 and the second for the 48th parliament. This report considers two proposed works by Airservices Australia. The first proposal deals with the Aviation Rescue Fire Fighting Services' NexGen project for the upgrade of end-of-life facilities for phase 1A in Queensland and Victoria, which has a budget of $163.4 million. The second proposal is for PFAS remediation works at the former firefighting training grounds at Rockhampton Airport in Queensland, with a budget of $24.975 million. Phase 1A of the NexGen works proposes to rebuild end-of-life facilities at Airservices Australia aviation rescue firefighting stations, complete minor works and build cold-drill firefighter training grounds across Queensland and Victoria. The proposed works are intended to support training objectives, comply with regulations and meet workforce capability needs. The works will also ensure that stations receiving the first newly procured ultralarge firefighting vehicles are fit for purpose and capable of storing the new fleet. The PFAS remediation at Rockhampton Airport propose to manage PFAS contamination from affected infrastructure and soil at the former firefighting training grounds at the airport. The objective of the proposed work is to reduce the risk of PFAS contamination to humans and the surrounding environment. This will occur by removing 90 per cent of the estimated 140 kilograms of PFAS mass residing in the soil and around the former firefighting training grounds. After conducting site inspections in Rockhampton related to the two inquiries and holding public and in camera hearings into the proposed works, the committee is satisfied with the proposals. The committee acknowledges the efforts of Airservices Australia to ensure that its firefighting stations are up to date and fit for purpose, and there are modernised training facilities to support the expanding workforce. Further, the committee acknowledges the proactive steps Airservices Australia has taken to ensure remediation works on PFAS contaminated sites are carried out efficiently and effectively. The committee, therefore, recommends it is expedient that the proposed works are carried out. I commend the report to the House.
Byner, Mr Leon | Statements by Members | House debates
I rise to acknowledge the life of radio personality Leon Byner, who passed away on Remembrance Day, 11 November. Through his top-rated mid-morning talkback program on 5AA, Leon became a trusted...
I rise to acknowledge the life of radio personality Leon Byner, who passed away on Remembrance Day, 11 November. Through his top-rated mid-morning talkback program on 5AA, Leon became a trusted household name throughout South Australia. Leon was not just a host but a problem solver and a justice advocate for people who had no-one else to turn to. He cared for people who were treated unfairly and was a straight talker, holding government and business leaders to account. Leon would always begin his program with a thoughtful commentary on a current issue of public concern, never taking political sides but focusing on the issue where a local, state or federal government or, at times, industry response was needed—and always giving every person in the firing line a chance to be heard. Through his callers and regular expert guests, Leon's program was filled with helpful everyday information. When Leon referred a caller to one of his many contacts, he would always ensure the referral had been followed up. Nothing slipped his mind. Poor health, sadly, brought Leon's six-decade radio career to an end. For the thousands of listeners who regularly tuned into his program, Leon will be remembered fondly and with much respect and gratitude. To Leon's family, his long-time producer, Tammii Caught, and all his radio colleagues and friends, I extend my condolences.
Makin Electorate: Schools | Constituency Statements | House debates
As we draw towards the end of the year I expect that, as I do, all members of this place will be attending year 12 graduation ceremonies in their electorates. They are special events that I look...
As we draw towards the end of the year I expect that, as I do, all members of this place will be attending year 12 graduation ceremonies in their electorates. They are special events that I look forward to, and I make every effort to attend the ceremonies of each of the public and private schools in the Makin electorate. Every school has its own individual way of celebrating year 12 graduations, and so they are all very different. However, for all the differences, there are important similarities in all the graduations. The first is the genuine care for the students shown by the respective teachers and other school staff and the reciprocal respect and gratitude students have for their teachers. The second is the impressive maturity and development of the students, who have reached a milestone in their lives, having completed some 12 years of structured education, and are about to embark on their own direction in life. We live in a time where, for all the supports and mod cons, for young people life can be so difficult. They are constantly influenced by the world around them. Additionally, peer pressure, bullying, self-esteem, image and exam preparation can all be disruptive influences on their lives, in a world that is already bursting with stress and anxiety. No-one understands these pressures better than the teachers who educate, guide and nurture the students on a daily basis at such a critical time in their lives. They listen to their stories and struggles with a sympathetic ear. These are teachers who simultaneously have their own personal lives and responsibilities to deal with—teachers whom I see on graduation nights filled with pride at seeing their year 12s graduate but also showing a touch of sadness as they say goodbye to the young people who have been so much a part of their lives. I thank staff at the following high schools in the Makin electorate: Banksia Park International High School, Endeavour College, Garden College, Gleeson College, Golden Grove High School, the Heights School, Kings Baptist Grammar School, Modbury High School, Para Hills High School, Parafield Gardens High School, Pedare Christian College, Pinnacle College, Roma Mitchell Secondary College, Salisbury East High School, Torrens Valley Christian School, Tyndale Christian School and Valley View Secondary School. I say thank you for all you do, year in and year out, in preparing young people in your care for their future as they consider their careers and ultimately make their contribution as future leaders of society. We owe all of those schools and their staff our genuine and sincere gratitude. To the graduates of 2025, I wish you well with your exam results and every success in your future.
United States-Australia Framework for Securing of Supply in the Mining and Processing of Critical Minerals and Rare Earths | Private Members' Business | House debates
Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I'm seeking the call to make a point of order. I very much appreciate the comments being made by the member for Gippsland, but I fail to understand how they are relevant to the bill that is...
I'm seeking the call to make a point of order. I very much appreciate the comments being made by the member for Gippsland, but I fail to understand how they are relevant to the bill that is currently before us, so perhaps he could advise the House as to what the relevance of that is to the bill before us. I would ask you to bring him back to the bill that's before us.
Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It's a pleasure to speak on the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and to follow the member for Sturt, who's just given a very good argument and a clear...
It's a pleasure to speak on the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and to follow the member for Sturt, who's just given a very good argument and a clear explanation of why this legislation is so important. Some 50 years ago, in 1975, in introducing the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Bill, the then Attorney-General Kep Enderby, stated: … the Tribunal is not to be an ordinary court, but neither is it to be an appendage of government departments. The Tribunal is to be regarded as machinery provided by Parliament for adjudication rather than as part of the machinery of departmental administration. Nothing less than a tribunal of full judicial status would be satisfactory for these purposes. He went on: The tribunal is not to be bound by the rules of evidence but is empowered to inform itself in any way it sees fit. He then ends his speech with: It will provide an opportunity to build up a significant body of administrative law and practice of general application as well as providing the machinery to ensure that persons are dealt with fairly and properly in their relationships with government. Those opening comments, I believe, very well describe the purpose and intent of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal and its successor, the Administrative Review Tribunal, which is the legislation that we are now dealing with. And albeit the name has changed, it is my view that the purpose and intent of the tribunal never did. Since 1975, when the Administrative Appeals Tribunal was established, society and the way it functions has changed markedly. Laws, regulations and processes have changed. Government administrative processes have changed as well. Society has changed. Community expectations and demands have changed. So where a grievance arises, the community must have confidence in the review process that is currently available to them. That is what this legislation seeks to do. It's a legislation that looks at what has happened in the past 50 years and seeks to address any flaws in that legislation, and effectively says, 'How can we do things better?' I believe this legislation will in fact lead us down the path where we will be doing things better. Any review process must be speedy, because for people who have lodged a review of their case with the department—and we've already heard that there are some 400 pieces of legislation under which people might challenge a decision—the delays can be both traumatic and even life-changing, as other speakers have quite rightly pointed out. Indeed, for people waiting for a decision, every day can seem like eternity, adding to stress whilst at the same time putting their lives on hold. With respect to that, I'm sure other members of this place would have had similar experiences as me within my office in Makin. We regularly see people come into the office who have lodged an appeal, because they want to challenge a decision, and have been waiting months and months for that appeal to be heard. In those intervening months, their lives are effectively put on hold or severely disrupted in a way that certainly causes them severe distress and anxiety. It's important that we have a process that deals with their applications as efficiently as possible. It's just as important that the outcome must be fair and just, which is why the Administrative Review Tribunal is not bound by normal legal framework. It is for that very reason. In fact, it has often been said that law and justice are not always the same. Indeed, a court is a place where the primary responsibility is to administer and apply law. The ART has, I believe, a slightly different role in that it's a process that seeks to deliver justice, common sense and fairness that might not otherwise be found when you simply apply law. In other words, it's a process where one would say it delivers a fair go. Sounds simple, but regrettably that has not always been the case. Too often decisions are made by ministers, their delegates or departmental officers who use their personal judgement and their analysis and sometimes, regrettably, their bias in reaching the decisions they make. We saw that with the robodebt debacle, where a flawed computer-generated process was used to burden people with wrongful debts. As everyone in this House knows, the consequences of the robodebt debacle were devastating for so many people. It's the role of the ART to ensure that the community can have confidence in whatever processes we put in place, from here going forward. Decisions under this new arrangement can now be made on the basis of written materials, without holding an oral hearing. This is particularly with respect to student visa cases, but I understand there is also flexibility for that to be extended in the future. The point I want to make is based on my experience in the Makin electorate. Many people have come in and said, 'Yes, we will lodge an application for a hearing to be held, but we don't feel confident to front up to the people that are going to sit there and make the decision.' Because they don't know the laws or they don't speak the language well—whatever the case is—they feel somewhat nervous about appearing before a tribunal, which they envisage as being a court setting. This new arrangements means that, in their own quiet time, they will be able to write things down and put together a submission, perhaps with the help of people who are willing to assist them, and then submit it so it can form part of the hearing. This is incredibly important, and it's an improvement on the current process, whereby they would otherwise have to go in themselves and appear. This process will be much more streamlined. It will enable more cases to be heard, and that in turn will shorten the waiting times that people are currently experiencing with respect to their appeal applications. As I said a moment ago, being able to present their case in the quietness of their own home will certainly save people the emotional stress they might feel when appearing before a quasi-judicial body. Simultaneously, timely decision-making will prevent non-genuine visa applicants from using the Administrative Review Tribunal as a delaying tactic, as the member for Sturt alluded to in her contribution a few moments ago. I have no doubt that some of the applications for review are lodged simply to delay a final decision being made. That not only ties up the tribunal's time and resources and puts people in the waiting queue for even longer, but it's also a costly process for taxpayers. It is often used simply as a delaying tactic so that someone can continue to do whatever it is they are appealing against. Again, a streamlined process which reduces the time for an application to be heard will hopefully eliminate some of that as well. Since 2024 we've seen a surge in student visa refusals. I don't know how many of those reviews end up in a decision being overturned. In fact, I say this with respect to all applications that go before the ART. How many of them successfully overturn the original decision? It would be an interesting study to carry out, and it would be important to know those statistics. Without knowing those statistics, it seems to me that the increase in the number of student applications warrants specific focus on those applications. This legislation does that, because it allows the process to be streamlined through applications being heard without the person appearing in person. It's a process which I believe will go a long way towards fixing up the current problem, which is the long waiting list. There are other matters in this legislation that others have spoken of which I won't go into detail about. I see the minister is in the chamber right now, and she probably wants to sum up. In a nutshell, this is simply an improvement that is warranted and arises because, as things change, we need to change the laws of the land to ensure that they are still relevant and applicable to society today. I commend the legislation to the House.
On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's third report of 2025, referral made in July 2025, and I ask leave of the House to make a short...
On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's third report of 2025, referral made in July 2025, and I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report. Leave granted. On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's third report for 2025—the first for the 48th Parliament. This report considers the proposed fit-out of new leased premises at 7 London Circuit, Canberra City, Australian Capital Territory, by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sports and the Arts. The total cost of delivery for the proposed fit-out is $32.5 million. The fit-out proposed by the department will use a precinct model to provide for the long-term accommodation needs of its staff. The leases of the two existing office sites, 111 Alinga Street and 62 Northbourne Avenue in Canberra City, are due to expire in June 2026, and both buildings are at the end of their economic lives. A precinct model of two existing buildings close to each other is proposed to provide a long-term accommodation solution for the department. The lease period for the new premises will be for 15 years, with an option to extend by an additional five years. As 7 London Circuit has been fully refurbished and is available for an immediate fit-out, it was selected by the department as the centrepiece for the two-building solution. The scope of the works reflects the different styles of working within the department and respects inclusion and accessibility requirements. The fit-out design is predominantly for open-plan, modular workstations with break-out areas and support facilities. The fit-out will also include a variety of workstations, settings, security services, multifaith and multipurpose rooms, staff amenities and equality of access for staff with disabilities. After conducting an inquiry into the proposed works, the committee is satisfied with the proposal and acknowledges the comprehensive staff consultation process undertaken by the department. The committee encourages the department to continue to prioritise accessibility preferences to ensure the fit-out accommodates the diverse and ever-changing needs of staff. The committee recommends that it is expedient that the proposed works are carried out. I thank the Public Works Joint Committee secretariat for all the work that they did in supporting the committee and putting together the information required for the committee to do its job. I commend the report to the House.
Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025, Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
It's always interesting listening to the member for New England. His contribution on this legislation, in my view, sums up exactly why we need this legislation—that is, the Australian...
It's always interesting listening to the member for New England. His contribution on this legislation, in my view, sums up exactly why we need this legislation—that is, the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025—which effectively sets up a centre for disease control. All legislation that comes to this place is important. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be before us and it wouldn't be debated. But this legislation is particularly important. Again I thank the member for New England, who raised a number of matters as to why that is so. It's important because it's legislation that ultimately affects every single one of the Australian people, not only because it may directly affect their health but because it also affects the economy and the country in which we live. When COVID struck, Australia was not prepared for it and the world was not prepared for it. Indeed, the last pandemic to hit the world was some hundred years earlier. So nobody who was trying to respond and manage the COVID pandemic that hit us had had any previous experience in doing that. The response that we saw across the world varied from country to country, as it did from state to state here in Australia. What is regrettable is that in many cases the long-term health and economic disruptions that hit us between 2019 and 2022 still linger today, some years later. Hardly a week goes by without someone speaking to me about the effects of the COVID that they contracted during that period, the effects of the vaccinations they received or, indeed, the economic disruptions they had to deal with at the time that effectively changed their life forever. In the interconnected world that we live in today it is more essential than ever before that we be better prepared for another global or national pandemic. The proposal to establish a centre for disease control, which I understand is intended to commence on 1 January 2026—I hope that is the case and that it is not further delayed—was not only part of the COVID review recommendations. Quite frankly, it's a commonsense response to the lessons that we all learned from COVID. In particular, we learned that our national health services must be better resourced and coordinated and that we must have better data shared across all jurisdictions—not only jurisdictions here in Australia but across the world. Hopefully, having a centre for disease control established in Australia, as some other countries have already done, will be a step in the right direction. Importantly, the data should be collected and shared by a body that the community has absolute confidence in, a body that is independent and free of political or commercial interests. The most common criticisms of the COVID experience that I have come across—I'm sure many of my colleagues in this place have had similar contact with people raising the same things—are that there were inadequate and unreliable medical research and COVID treatment options available to people, that the vaccine response was heavily influenced by big pharmaceutical companies with a vested interest in the vaccines and that directions from the World Health Organization could not always be relied on. There were, indeed, too many mixed messages and too many opinions out there at the time, which left people confused about what they should do. To this day, I regularly hear from people who are adamant that they or their family members continue to suffer from the long-term health effects of the COVID vaccines. Of course, it may be argued that the long-term health effects that they refer to could also be attributed to the COVID infection itself. Some of those questions will never truly be answered, and I know that the debate continues. This legislation—the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 and Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025—better coordinates the national health expertise that presently exists. The proposed director-general and advisory council will ensure both the independence and the health expertise that the community can have confidence in. Australia already has a very thorough and cautious health regulation system. In fact, when I was a member of the health standing committee of this parliament I heard through one of our inquiries, where we were looking at the TGA approval process, about how cautious the Australian health system is. Many would say that the Australian health regulators are overcautious, too thorough and, consequently, too slow to clear medical advances. Whether that's true is, again, a matter for debate. Quite frankly, I think the overcautious approach of our health regulators can sometimes be in the national interest. But I accept that at times, because of that overcaution, medical breakthroughs are slow in being allowed to be used here in Australia. Nevertheless, having a centre for disease control may streamline some processes and in turn ensure a faster response to health matters when there is an urgency to do so. When COVID struck there was an urgency to do so, which was indeed one of the very criticisms that we often faced—that we were allowing vaccinations to be administered that had not been properly proven. I can recall getting briefings from our health experts in this country, and I still believe to this day that the advice provided by those health experts was that Australia had in fact taken sufficient precautions before allowing any of those vaccinations to be released. I note that under this legislation the Centre for Disease Control will assume control over a number of existing health functions and that it will collaborate with world health organisations. In fact, the member for New England a moment ago talked about biosecurity issues that he has legitimate concerns about. But my view is that this legislation will allow much better liaison between each of the health teams in this country, and it gives the director-general and the advisory council direct access to all the information that is available so that they can make the best possible decision on behalf of the Australian people. We live in a world where people travel more than ever before, where global trade sees millions of shipping containers move from one country to another every year. I was just looking up some statistics on that. I understand that each year around 250 million shipping containers are shipped from one place to another, and on any given day there are about six million shipping containers out there on the seas. We know that because of people travelling and because of goods being exported from one country to another the risk of disease infection spreading from one country to another is greater than ever before. Again, it is for reasons like that that we need the Centre for Disease Control, as a way of trying to manage the issues if a disease does come to our country. We have seen even in the past couple of decades things like HIV/AIDS and Ebola, as well as COVID, decimating some countries and certainly having an impact right around the world. Setting up the Centre for Disease Control will of course cost money. I understand it's going to cost some $251 million over the next four years and about $70 million annually thereafter. My view is that, as with all health expenditure, the health costs of doing nothing are always much higher than spending the money up-front, being prepared and saving taxpayer dollars downstream, which is what will happen if we don't set this up and we go through another episode, as we did with COVID, where we saw the costs ballooning right out. Again, the member for New England touched on that and made that very point. So we don't want to do that again. We want to be in a situation where we can better manage an outbreak when it occurs. I will finish on this point and use some examples to justify the point I'm about to make. Having a health system that the Australian people can have confidence in has been a core Labor value for decades. It has been a priority issue for the Australian people, a priority issue for the Albanese Labor government and a priority issue for the Minister for Health and Ageing, who is in the chamber right now. As a result of that, since 2022 we have seen a remarkable transformation of our health system in this country. We have tripled the bulk-billing incentive, which was initially for pensioners, concession card holders and families with children. From 1 November that will be extended to all Medicare eligible patients, and I note that, previous to that, the coalition government had frozen the rebate for years. We've opened over 90 bulk-billed Medicare urgent care clinics, and there are more than another 40 to come. Labor has delivered cheaper medicines, with a script to cost Australians no more than $25 under the PBS. Again, this is the lowest, I think, since 2004. The cost of PBS medicines for pensioners and concession card holders has been frozen at $7.70 until 2030. We've established a network of 61 free walk-in adult Medicare mental health centres across Australia, and we're establishing 33 endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics across every state and territory. Those are just some of the key matters, but there are a lot more, and I'm sure the minister for health can elaborate on those if he wishes to. The reality is that health is the one single issue that matters to each and every Australian, because at some stage in their life they will need to have access to our health system in one way or another. This legislation not only will directly impact on how we can manage another pandemic, should one occur, but, quite frankly, would also ensure that we better manage the economy as a result of what we saw from COVID, which had a devastating effect on so many Australians. I commend the legislation to the House. I hope it is not delayed, because, personally, I'd like to see it kick off on 1 January 2026.
Srebrenica Genocide: 30th Anniversary | Statements on Significant Matters | House debates
It has been 30 years since the 11 July 1995 Srebrenica massacre, when 8,372 men, women and children were mercilessly killed by Bosnian Serb forces under the leadership of Radovan Karadzic, the...
It has been 30 years since the 11 July 1995 Srebrenica massacre, when 8,372 men, women and children were mercilessly killed by Bosnian Serb forces under the leadership of Radovan Karadzic, the then president of the self-declared autonomous Bosnian Serb republic. It was the worst massacre of civilians since World War II, yet outside of the communities affected there is very little awareness of what is a very dark chapter in recent history. For the people of Srebrenica who fled and survived the massacre, and for the Bosniaks more broadly, Srebrenica is a memory that will never fade and a grief that torments them daily. Each year on 11 July I attend the annual Srebrenica commemoration service at the Bosnian and Herzegovina Muslim Society of South Australia community centre at Royal Park. I hear the heart-wrenching stories from survivors, I see the tears in the eyes as they tell their stories, I see the grief in their faces for the family members and friends they have lost, and I feel the anger that such murderous brutality took place whilst the world looked away. According to a UNHCR research paper, between 1992 and 1995 around 100,000 people were killed in what is referred to as the Bosnian War. Of those killed, around 80,000 were Bosnian Muslims, more widely referred to as Bosniaks. By 1995, when the fighting ended, of a Bosnian population of around four million, 1.3 million had been internally displaced and 900,000 had become refugees. Subsequent war trials and investigations by the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia have concluded that the killings, the destruction of Bosnian culturally significant buildings and the expulsion of some 20,000 Bosniak civilians from the area amount to genocide. It was very much an attempt to drive Bosnian Muslims out of Bosnia. Catholic Croatians were also driven out. The International Court of Justice, in its judgement of 26 February 2007, states: The Court concludes that the acts committed at Srebrenica falling within Article II (a) and (b) of the Convention were committed with the specific intent to destroy in part the group of the Muslims of Bosnia and Herzegovina as such; and accordingly that these were acts of genocide, committed by members of the VRS in and around Srebrenica from about 13 July 1995. The judgement goes on: … the Court considers that it has been established by fully conclusive evidence that members of the protected group were systematically victims of massive mistreatment, beatings, rape and torture causing serious bodily and mental harm, during the conflict and, in particular, in the detention camps. The United Nations has since designated 11 July as the International Day of Reflection and Commemoration of the 1995 Genocide in Srebrenica. To date, some 30 people have been indicted for participating in or complicity in genocide. There are still hundreds if not thousands of bodies that have not been recovered and that possibly lie in mass graves. The search for them continues. Each year, more bodies are recovered and identified and their names added to the list of those killed. With the passing of time and the benefit of hindsight, there is no doubt that the Srebrenica genocide was a dark chapter in recent history. The world failed the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina when it could and should have intervened. The killings, the brutality, the rapes and the humanitarian disaster could have been prevented. The lives lost for ever, for those who survived but who live with the horrific memories of the atrocities or the daily absence of the loved ones that they lost, gave rise to a hope that Srebrenica would never happen again—to no-one and nowhere. Yet credible claims of killings, oppression, persecution and brutal violence continue each and every day—in Gaza; in Syria, where the Druze community in Suwayda is under attack; in Sri Lanka; in Iran; in Afghanistan; in Ukraine; in Myanmar; and in so many parts of Africa. Indeed, only earlier today we heard from the member for McMahon, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, about the horrific situation in Sudan. It seems to me that humanity never learns. Human behaviour never changes. But what happened on 11 July 1995 at Srebrenica will not be erased from history and will continue to serve as a reminder to us all of the global failures at the time and that we all have a responsibility to do what we can. As a global community, we must do better.
South Australia: Italian Community | Constituency Statements | House debates
Last year marked the 70th anniversary of the St Francis of Assisi Catholic Community of Newton and the important role of the Capuchin friars in the parish throughout those years. The history and...
Last year marked the 70th anniversary of the St Francis of Assisi Catholic Community of Newton and the important role of the Capuchin friars in the parish throughout those years. The history and growth of the parish was recorded in a 320-page commemorative book published in 2024, titled 70 Years: A Celebration of Faith, Mission and Fraternity. On 26 July, the Campania Sports and Social Club in Modbury celebrated its 50th anniversary with a sold-out gala dinner, at which the member for Sturt and I were privileged to attend. Later this month, on 28 September, the annual religious celebration of the Madonna Di Montevergine held at the St Francis of Assisi Catholic centre—possibly the largest religious event of its type in Australia—marks its 70th anniversary. At Adelaide's Glynde Corner proudly stands an award-winning landmark stone monument as a symbol and reminder of South Australia's migration story. The common thread and primary driver of the examples I've just cited have been the Italian migrants from the Campania region of Italy, who came to Australia in the 1950s and 1960s and settled predominantly in the eastern and northern suburbs of Adelaide. They came with very meagre possessions but with a will to succeed in the land of opportunity, and succeed they did. Today Italian Australians of Campania origin can be found in successful businesses, professions, academia, trades, food production, politics, entertainments, sports—in nearly every sector of South Australian life. But they did not just succeed for themselves; they made a real difference to life in South Australia. For example, their community facilities at the Campania club at Modbury, San Giorgio La Molara Club at Payneham, Altavilla Club at Beulah Park and Molinara club at Holden Hill are regularly used by the wider community. In 2003, a book was published titled I Campani in South Australia, documenting their extensive history and contribution to South Australia. At the recent 50th anniversary celebration of the Campania club, the large number of dignitaries—which included Governor of South Australia, Her Excellency Frances Adamson; Premier Peter Malinauskas; and Italian consul Ernesto Pianelli, with congratulatory messages from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Senator Francesco Giacobbe from Italy—highlighted the deserved recognition of the migrants from Campania in South Australia. The Campania club, initially developed through the drive of John Di Fede and some 14 other founding members and now led by a next generation club president Ross De Ieso, today stands as a visual example of the presence, determination and influence of the people who came from Campania. My thanks to all of them for all they have done. They have so much to be proud of.
Defence Industry | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. How is the Albanese Labor government growing Australia's defence industrial base, supporting jobs and building a future made in Australia? Why...
My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. How is the Albanese Labor government growing Australia's defence industrial base, supporting jobs and building a future made in Australia? Why is this important after a wasted decade?