Louise Miller-Frost's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Bolkus, Hon. Nick | Condolences | House debates
I rise today with deep sadness to acknowledge the passing of former senator the Hon. Nick Bolkus. Nick was a towering figure in South Australian public life, a formidable parliamentarian and a...
I rise today with deep sadness to acknowledge the passing of former senator the Hon. Nick Bolkus. Nick was a towering figure in South Australian public life, a formidable parliamentarian and a man whose contribution to this nation leaves a lasting imprint on the character of our country. And while his public contributions are well known, his private contributions are equally important. He was a much-loved husband to Mary and a father to Nick, Aria and Michaela. He was a colleague and mentor to many in the Labor movement across Australia, particularly SA Labor, and he was a valued friend to many. I'm lucky enough to be able to count myself as one of those. For many Australians, and particularly for those of us from South Australia, Nick Bolkus was more than a senator. He was a reformer, a strategist, a Labor legend and, above all, a believer in the power of public service to improve lives. Nick was born in Adelaide in 1950 to migrant parents from the island of Kastellorizo in Greece, and his parents ran a greengrocer shop in Adelaide's West End. He was educated at Adelaide High School and Adelaide University—a true local. He showed his interest in politics early, fundraising and hand-delivering letters supporting Don Dunstan in 1965 and 1966 at the tender age of 15. After a brief career as a lawyer, he unsuccessfully ran for the seat of Torrens in 1975 and for federal Senate in 1977 before being elected as a federal senator for South Australia in 1980. Entering parliament at just 30 years of age, he quickly developed a reputation that would follow him throughout his career. Nick was intellectually sharp, politically courageous and never afraid to engage in the contest of ideas. His wife, Mary, says he was always certain of his position, and she wondered how it was that two people who were always right ended up married to each other! He understood that democracy is not a spectator sport. It requires conviction, resilience and a willingness to stand up for what you believe is right, irrespective of the cost. And Nick brought those qualities in abundance. He was a key minister in the Hawke-Keating governments: Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister Assisting the Treasurer for Prices and Minister for Administrative Services. But he's perhaps best known as having been Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. In this latter role he reviewed the Migration Act and the Australian Citizenship Act and established the Refugee Review Tribunal. He was instrumental in allowing thousands of Chinese students to remain in Australia after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Thousands of lives were changed. At Nick's state memorial service we heard from Dr Hang Quach, a professor of haematology from St Vincent's Hospital in Melbourne. She told the story of her father being sentenced to life in prison as a political prisoner in Vietnam after the war and how her mother fled in fear to Australia as a refugee with two small children. Dr Quach was aged four at the time. They didn't know if her father was dead or alive or if they would ever see him again. As a 15-year-old, she wrote to Senator Nick Bolkus. One day she answered the phone at her home, and, to her great surprise, it was Senator Bolkus. It took a couple of years, but he performed the miracle. He managed to negotiate for her father to be released from prison and deported to Australia. At the state memorial, she showed a photograph of Nick and her father meeting for the first time, her father as a free man. Of course, she and her mother re-met the father that she couldn't remember, having not seen him for the best part of a decade and a half. Her father lived out his years in Australia, and his daughter is now changing the lives of Australians through her clinical research. She spoke of being forever grateful for the compassion and the second chance her family got in this wonderful country thanks to Senator Bolkus. It's impossible to know how many hundreds of thousands—maybe millions—of Australians' lives have been changed for the better because of the work Nick Bolkus did in immigration, citizenship, multicultural and ethnic affairs fields. He approached legislation with rigour and seriousness, always conscious that the decisions made within these walls ripple far beyond Canberra into households, workplaces and communities across Australia. But what truly distinguished Nick Bolkus was not simply the positions he held but the principles that guided him. He believed in fairness. He believed in opportunity. He believed in multiculturalism and that diversity makes us a stronger and greater nation. He believed that government, at its best, could be a force for dignity, particularly for those whose voices were too often unheard. Those who knew him personally speak not only of his intellect but of his loyalty and warmth. Politics can be an unforgiving profession, yet Nick forged friendships across factions and across the aisle. The capacity to disagree without disrespect is a lesson all of us in public life would do well to remember. The Nick I knew was sharp, witty and very, very softly spoken, but you always leant forward to hear what he was saying because it was always worthwhile. Nick died on Christmas Day last year after a long illness that tried his patience. My heart goes out to my dear friend Mary, to Aria, to Mikayla, to Nick and to his sister, Ana. Nick believed future generations deserve a nation more just, more prosperous and more compassionate than the one they inherited. He was not one who believed in pulling up the ladder after himself, and he demonstrated that through his work and through his life. While political careers eventually conclude, bodies age and memories fade, the impact of public service lives on. It lives on in stronger institutions, fairer laws and expanded opportunities for others. It lives on in the lives of those you have impacted. Nick's legacy lives on in individuals like Dr Quach and all the patients she helps, in the SA Labor Party, forever changed by his guidance and support, and in the multicultural Australia he helped shape. Nick Bolkus understood that legacy is not measured in titles but in the difference one makes and in the lives you change. May he rest in peace.
Boothby Electorate: Infrastructure | Statements | House debates
I'm thrilled to announce that the three tram overpasses on the Glenelg line in Boothby are complete, open and operational. This is yet another example of the Albanese Labor government and the...
I'm thrilled to announce that the three tram overpasses on the Glenelg line in Boothby are complete, open and operational. This is yet another example of the Albanese Labor government and the Malinauskas state Labor government working together to achieve important infrastructure projects on time and on budget. The tram overpasses eliminate three level crossings. Boom gates were previously down for up to 20 minutes an hour, and rush hour traffic backed up for kilometres. These overpasses were promised at the 2016, 2018, and 2019 state and federal elections, but it took the election of an SA Labor government and a federal Labor government in 2022 to actually get them done. Instead of just doing our initial two bridge commitment, we got the Morphett Road overpass done at the same time. Many in my electorate thought the Morphett Road overpass would be impossible to engineer, given its proximity to the Sturt River and Glengowrie tram barn entrance. Challenge accepted! With a sneaky three-point turn on the tracks, the trams can go home at night. This is part of a coordinated plan to manage traffic in the growing southern suburbs of Adelaide, including the Majors Road on-off ramp, which opened a few months ago; the North-South Corridor, which is underway; and, in the future, the Greater Adelaide Freight Bypass to take trucks off Cross Road. The Albanese Labor government is delivering for the people of Boothby.
Defence Equipment | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. How is a united Albanese Labor government delivering defence capability to keep Australians safe? What approaches has the government rejected?
Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
For many years before I came to this place I worked in the health sector in South Australia. I ran a large number of services across northern and central Adelaide and some statewide services....
For many years before I came to this place I worked in the health sector in South Australia. I ran a large number of services across northern and central Adelaide and some statewide services. Another of my roles included recruitment of overseas doctors to rural and remote South Australia, and this was partly because we don't have enough doctors in Australia and partly because many of them don't want to work in rural and remote areas. Many of these basic services—general practitioners who often also cover at the local hospital—were reliant on being able to recruit doctors, nurses, pharmacists and allied health workers from overseas who were required to spend at least a few years in rural and remote areas. Health services are reliant on qualified staff to run, and, unfortunately, as a country we have not been training up enough of them for decades. We also have an ageing population, and often with ageing comes an increased reliance on the health system—bodies wear out, chronic diseases develop, trips and falls become more catastrophic. So we need more of these health professionals, and we needed them yesterday. There are ethical issues about recruiting precious health worker resources from other countries; they need them as well. The alternative is that we train them up here in Australia, and we absolutely need to be doing that. But it takes time, and we needed this extra workforce yesterday. Our health system is under pressure today from increased demand and from workforce shortages. A doctor takes six years of university study, then an internship. A GP takes a further five years on top of that. A nurse takes an undergraduate degree of three years, and a nurse practitioner takes at least three years experience and then a master's degree on top of that. A pharmacist takes a minimum of four years of study, plus one year of an intern training program. We are not going to be solving our health workforce shortage here in the next year or two through training up additional workers here, although we absolutely need to be doing that. When I spoke to the now minister for health and ageing a couple of years ago, I was really pleased to hear about the work that was being done on scope of practice across a number of different professions in the health workforce. Today I'm pleased to be able to support the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025. It's a practical, forward-looking reform that strengthens Medicare, supports our health workforce and improves timely access to affordable medicines for Australians no matter where they live. At its core, this bill amends the National Health Act 1953 and the Health Insurance Act 1973 to allow appropriately qualified registered nurses to prescribe certain medicines under the PBS. It's not a radical step. It is a sensible evolution of modern health care, one grounded in evidence, informed by expert review and driven by the needs of patients. Importantly, it makes the best possible use of our existing health workforce, which is good for patients, is good for the health workers themselves and is good for our overall health system. The purpose of healthcare reform should always be clear: better outcomes for patients. Today too many Australians struggle to access timely care. In rural and regional communities patients often travel long distances simply to obtain a prescription. In our outer suburbs families can wait days, sometimes weeks, for appointments. This bill addresses those barriers directly by enabling authorised nurse prescribers to prescribe medicines on the PBS. Patients receiving treatment from these clinicians will be able to access subsidised medicines without unnecessary delay. This is about equity, about ensuring that where you live does not determine the quality or speed of your health care and about recognising a simple truth: when patients receive treatment earlier, outcomes improve and pressure on the system declines. Australia's nurses are among the most highly trained and respected professionals in our health system, yet, for too long, rigid regulatory settings have prevented many of them from working their full scope of practice. This bill changes that. It establishes a formal process through which eligible registered nurses may be approved as authorised prescribers with mechanisms for suspension or revocation if standards are not met. It also ensures that these prescribers are subject to oversight by the Professional Services Review, the same safeguard applied to other PBS prescribers. And, to be clear, this reform expands access without compromising safety. Prescribing will remain contingent on appropriate education, competency and registration requirements already fundamental to safe clinical practice in Australia. In other words, this is reform with guardrails. But this legislation does not emerge in isolation. It implements recommendations from the Strengthening Medicare Taskforce and the Scope of Practice Review, reforms designed to empower health professionals and modernise primary care. Those reviews recognise what many clinicians already know: Australia cannot meet growing healthcare demand without using the full capability of our workforce. Designated nurse prescribing will help ease workforce pressures, build long-term system capacity and support sustainability across primary care. By enabling suitably qualified nurses to expand their scope of practice, it will also support workforce retention issues. At a time when emergency departments are crowded and GP shortages are felt across the country, we cannot afford to leave skilled professionals underutilised. This is smart reform, the kind that improves productivity while enhancing patient care. If there is one place where this reform will make an immediate difference, it's rural and remote Australia. The government has been clear: empowering nurses to practice at full scope will provide more equitable access to treatment for people living outside our major cities. As well as running health services across SA, including some rural and remote services, I also lived in a very small country town for a number of years, providing services into general practices scattered across remote SA. Access to timely health care can be a challenge in remote areas and can require considerable planning and travel. Consider the farmer managing a chronic condition hundreds of kilometres from a specialist or an elderly resident in a small town whose local clinic struggles to recruit doctors or the young family who cannot afford repeated travel just to renew a prescription. For these Australians this bill is not theoretical; it's transformational. It means fewer delays, fewer avoidable hospital visits and greater continuity of care within their communities. The minister's second reading remarks captured the reforms succinctly. Empowering nurses to provide safe, high-quality care directly in the community reduces the need for GP visits and long waits in overcrowded emergency departments. This is precisely the kind of structural reform our health system needs. Too often patients end up in hospital because primary care was inaccessible. Too often GPs spend valuable consultation time on straightforward prescribing tasks when their expertise could be better utilised elsewhere. Allowing trained nurses to manage appropriate prescribing frees doctors to focus on complex care, a win for efficiency and a win for the patients. This reform also aligns with Australia's longstanding commitment to affordable medicines. The government has stated that the change promotes equitable, affordable and timely access to high-quality medicines and services consistent with the National Medicines Policy. And let's remember what the PBS represents: for generations, it has been a cornerstone of Australian health care, ensuring that life-saving medicines are accessible not only to the wealthy but to every Australian citizen. By expanding the pool of authorised prescribers, we strengthen that system rather than strain it. Access delayed is access denied, and this bill ensures access delivered sooner. As with any reform, stakeholders have raised questions, particularly about which medicines nurse prescribers may ultimately prescribe. These matters, however, will be determined by the minister through disallowable legislative instruments, allowing appropriate scrutiny and flexibility as clinical practice evolves. This is good legislative design. It ensures parliament establishes the framework while allowing expert guidance to shape operational detail. So let's not let hypothetical fears overshadow the very real benefits this reform will deliver. Australia has successfully expanded prescribing roles before to nurse practitioners, dentists, optometrists and midwives, always with patient safety at the forefront. And it isn't unknown overseas either. In the UK, most community health visitors have the V100 or community practitioner nurse prescriber qualification. In New Zealand, nurse practitioners have been authorised to prescribe within scope of competence since 2001. In South Africa and Canada and even in all 50 states of the US, nurse practitioners can prescribe. This is not a radical change. It is a well-thought-through logical change with strong guardrails, and it continues to put patient safety and patient wellbeing at the centre of health care. The National Health Act 1953 has long underpinned the provision of pharmaceutical and medical services in Australia, but a health system built for the 1950s cannot remain frozen in time. Our population is ageing. Chronic disease is rising. Demand for care is growing faster than workforce supply. If we fail to modernise, we risk bottlenecks that hurt patients and exhaust clinicians. This bill is exactly the kind of targeted legislative update required to meet 21st century challenges, not sweeping upheaval but thoughtful adaptation. Sustainability is not only about funding; it's about structure. A resilient health system distributes responsibility across a skilled, multidisciplinary workforce. It encourages collaboration rather than hierarchy. It removes unnecessary barriers that prevent professionals from delivering care. By building long-term capacity, this reform will strengthen the system for decades to come. Future governments, regardless of political persuasion, will benefit from the foundations laid today, because good health policy should never be partisan. It should be pragmatic. This is part of a broader vision. The Australian healthcare system, despite its challenges, is world class. If you are sick or injured, you wouldn't want to be anywhere else in the world. But it is a system under pressure, where demand is rising, and so we need to continue to ensure it works to its maximum ability with all the resources, including workforce, that we can provide. This change enacts the vision of a health system where nurses practice to their full capability, patients receive timely treatment, rural communities enjoy genuine healthcare equity and hospitals are reserved for those who truly need them. This is not an abstract aspiration. It is exactly what this legislation advances. The Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025 is measured, responsible and necessary reform. It empowers trusted professionals. It improves access to medicines. It supports rural Australians. It reduces system pressure. It strengthens Medicare. And, most importantly, it places patients, not bureaucracy, at the centre of care. Parliament is often at its best when it embraces practical reforms that make everyday life easier for Australians, and this is one of those moments. Let us back our nurses and modernise our health system to ensure that every Australian can access the care they need, when they need it, where they need it, no matter where they call home. I commend the bill to the House.
Economy | Matters of Public Importance | House debates
It's been a really interesting day. We've just heard that apparently the Reserve Bank governor was not telling the truth, because she was being polite, which frankly is a little bit patronising...
It's been a really interesting day. We've just heard that apparently the Reserve Bank governor was not telling the truth, because she was being polite, which frankly is a little bit patronising for a professional woman at the top of her career. During question time, we discovered that the member for Fairfax, who is now both the shadow Treasurer and the shadow Assistant Treasurer, doesn't know how interest rates are set. Perhaps he needs a better assistant. Anyway, while it may be inconvenient for an opposition desperate to politicise everything to deflect attention from their chaos and disorder, Reserve Bank Governor Bullock has in fact said that the drivers of inflation in Australia are strong domestic demand relative to supply, housing costs and market service prices, labour and non-labour pressures, temporary price movements and a tight labour market, which of course means we have low unemployment. You will note that government spending was not included in her comments, and I don't think she was just being polite. I think she knows her stuff. In fact, nor was it included in the Reserve Bank board's comments today, where the cause identified was in fact growth in private demand. Let's not forget that the opposition, when they were in government, left Australia with inflation that was 6.1 per cent and rising. It's now much lower than that. They left us with higher spending, no savings and bigger deficits. And then most recently, as coalition opposition, they went to the election with a plan for bigger deficits, more debt and a plan to hike up taxes for every taxpayer to pay for nuclear reactors. We are focused on cost of living. They're focused on themselves. They oppose pretty much every cost-of-living measure to help Australians that we put forward over the last term of government, right down to voting against tax cuts for Australians. Meanwhile, we delivered two surpluses after a decade of deficits under them and paid down some of the Liberal debt we inherited from those opposite. The MYEFO showed the budget is now $233 billion better than what we inherited, and we found more than $114 billion in savings. But, if the opposition truly thinks we should be cutting government spending, perhaps they could suggest exactly where they would like those cuts. Do they want us to cut health funding? We know they've tried to undermine Medicare since it was introduced, and, at a time when we have an ageing population with increased demands on the health system, we have responded by investing in Medicare urgent care clinics, Medicare mental health clinics, 1800MEDICARE, cheaper medicines, 60-day scripts and extra funding for the hospital system in our agreement with the states. So do they want to cut funding for health? We know they neglected veterans, so maybe that's where those opposite think we should be cutting spending. When we came to government in 2022, there was a backlog of 42,000 veterans total and permanent incapacitation claims. These claims were sitting in the department for up to 18 months or more. They had not even been allocated to a worker for assessment, and I can only assume that's their idea of saving money—by not paying veterans' TPI claims. Shame on them for targeting people who've served our country, who, as we know, often only put their claims in when they're really desperate. But, when we came to government, we were appalled at their treatment of veterans, so we fixed the problem. We allocated an extra $477 million to process the claims, and those claims, paying veterans who've served our country what they are justly entitled to, have cost an additional $8.5 billion. So is that the government funding that those opposite think we should cut? We know they don't believe in or maybe don't understand climate change and the need for energy transition, since 22 coal-fired power stations announced closure under them and they did nothing about it. Perhaps they want to cut funding for clean energy and instead spend squillions of government dollars on nuclear power plants. Perhaps they want us to get rid of the tax cut that will be coming in July this year and the one in the following July. We know they opposed our tax cuts in the last term of government, and they took a policy to reverse tax cuts and in fact increase taxes on Australians to the last election. It really is easy to say 'cut government spending' with no detail. They don't seem to have learned from their detail-free policies at the last election, and they've reverted to a three-word slogan: cut government spending. But budgets are serious business, and spending cuts have impacts on real Australians. I challenge those opposite: give us some detail on what you actually think we should cut. Are you saying we should cut spending on infrastructure like roads? Should we cut on defence? Should it be education? Are we cutting the age pension or cost-of-living measures? You need to tell us what it is. (Time expired)
Bondi Beach Attack Victims | Condolences | House debates
The afternoon of Sunday 14 December at Bondi Beach was a warm, sunny 28 degrees—perfect beach weather. For members of the Jewish community, it was also the first day of Hanukkah, the...
The afternoon of Sunday 14 December at Bondi Beach was a warm, sunny 28 degrees—perfect beach weather. For members of the Jewish community, it was also the first day of Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights. This important Jewish festival commemorates the rededication of the second temple after a revolt and, specifically, the discovery of one day's supply of oil to light the menorah: a supply that miraculously lasted instead for eight days. It is a holy day. It's the day of optimism and hope, of light over darkness. It's also a day of celebration, and the local Sydney Jewish community were celebrating it at Bondi at a festival called Chanukah by the Sea. They were reaching out to the local community, sharing their celebration and their culture. We know that one of the heroes of this tragedy, a Muslim man, Ahmed al-Ahmed, said he was invited into the festival by a rabbi after trying to get into a few of the local cafes that were full. This scene of joy and community was interrupted by two men with hate in their hearts and guns in their hands. Scenes of families celebrating together and sharing food became scenes of tragedy. Fifteen people who went to Bondi that day—expecting to relax, celebrate and have some fun with friends and family—didn't go home that night. Fifteen lives were lost, their potential cut short, and 15 families and communities were devastated by those deaths; their lives will never be the same. A further 41 were injured and countless others traumatised by what they saw and experienced that day. And communities across the country—Jewish communities and other communities—felt less safe going to bed that night. This is not the Australia we want. This is not the Australia we value. We are a friendly people. We are a diverse and welcoming people. What happened in Bondi that sunny evening is not the Australia we want; these are not Australian values. But in the midst of tragedy and devastation, in the midst of seeing the worst side of human nature, we also saw the best side. We saw Ahmed al-Ahmed, unarmed, tackle and disarm one of the gunmen despite significant injuries to himself. We saw Boris and Sofia Gurman wrestling with a gunman, trying to disarm him. They paid the ultimate price. We saw Reuven Morrison throwing a brick, the only weapon he had to hand, at one of the gunmen. He also paid the ultimate price. And we saw Alexander Kleytman, a Holocaust survivor, shielding his wife with his body, even as he took the bullets that ended his life. We saw 14-year-old Chaya, who shielded two toddlers with her body and was shot in the leg. There were, no doubt, many other such stories. Of course, we saw countless surf lifesavers, police, ambulance officers and first responders responding to the injured and the deceased even while the shooting was going on. We thank them all, and we offer condolences to the families and friends of the deceased. This is one of the turning points in the life of this country. As Australians we need to think about the kind of community we want to be. We can be what we want to be, but we need to commit ourselves to making it so. We need to make conscious decisions about the future we want, the future we can work together to create. I want a community where we all feel safe. I want a community where we recognise that no matter our faith, our cultural background, the colour of our skin, our gender or who we choose to love, we all feel safe. I want a community where people of all faiths or of no faith can genuinely express who they are in a public space and feel safe; otherwise, hate has won. And if one of us is less safe, then we are all less safe. The future is in our hands, and we need to be intentional about what we want it to be. A Jewish tradition asks us to remember the dead by saying their names, and I'll finish on that: Boris and Sofia Gurman; Rabbi Eli Schlanger; Dan Elkayam; 10-year-old Matilda, the youngest victim; Rabbi Yaakov Levitan; Edith Brutman; Adam Smyth; Boris Tetleroyd; Marika Pogany; Peter Meagher; Alex Kleytman; Tibor Weitzen; Reuven Morrison; Tania Tretiak. May their memories be a blessing.
Albanese Government | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Leader of the House. As the parliamentary year draws to a close and we move towards the Christmas season, what are the different approaches to delivery that have been taken...
My question is to the Leader of the House. As the parliamentary year draws to a close and we move towards the Christmas season, what are the different approaches to delivery that have been taken so far in the 48th Parliament?
Mental Health Month | Statements on Significant Matters | House debates
Australia is in the midst of a mental health crisis, and the statistics are stark. One in two Australian adults will suffer from a mental illness at some point in their lives. Three thousand...
Australia is in the midst of a mental health crisis, and the statistics are stark. One in two Australian adults will suffer from a mental illness at some point in their lives. Three thousand Australians will take their own lives each year as a result of mental ill health. In South Australia, one in five people experience a mental illness every year, and 43 per cent of South Australians will experience a mental illness in their lifetime. While we wouldn't think twice about seeking professional care for a physical injury, too often we treat mental illness with an unseriousness we wouldn't treat the common cold with. That's why Mental Health Month is so important in bringing awareness to an issue which has, for decades, been under prioritised when it comes to government support. I've worked in and around the mental health space all my life. I've run primary mental health services across South Australia, including in rural and remote areas. I've run primary health services for SA Health in the city, as well as homelessness services for Catherine House and Vinnies. And I've witnessed firsthand the emotional and financial toll that a mental illness can take on a person's life if the mental illness is left unchecked, untreated. The effects of mental ill health are felt far beyond the individual sufferer. It can have devastating impacts for the family and the community. The factors known to have a causative link to mental ill health are many and various, including unemployment, homelessness, financial insecurity, family and domestic violence, and significant life events. But a lack of accessible and affordable mental health services in the local community can mean a short-term episode becomes a long-term, serious, debilitating illness. Poor access to mental health services can be due to a range of issues: limited mental health workforce, continuing stigma around mental illness, a lack of collaboration across the different types of mental health services, an unequal concentration of mental health services in metropolitan areas to the detriment of regional and rural areas, and the high demand for mental health services where there is an undersupply of workers. But there is hope. Hope exists in a government that is prepared to take your mental health seriously—a government that is prepared to acknowledge the fact that a mentally unhealthy Australia means a socially and economically poorer Australia, a government that is prepared to support the most health-vulnerable members of our community by making access to mental health services easier and more affordable, and a government that will continue Labor's proud legacy of ensuring that health care and mental health care is a right and not a privilege. That's why, as part of our Medicare plan, the Albanese Labor government has committed to investing an historic $1.1 billion to expand and enhance mental health services right across this country. The numbers speak for themselves: 91 Medicare mental health centres, 20 perinatal mental health centres, 17 Medicare mental health kids hubs and 203 headspace services. In my electorate of Boothby, we have a very well-utilised headspace service helping young Australians between the ages of 12 and 25 navigate their mental health challenges. I visited there recently myself, and the staff do an absolutely excellent job, including one-off, walk-in visits. In December this year we will open a mental health kids hub in the Marion GP Plus centre, providing crucial early intervention support and resources for children and their families. A Medicare mental health centre will also be established in Marion, providing a free walk-in service delivered by a multidisciplinary team. Work on a perinatal health centre is currently underway in Elizabeth, in northern Adelaide, and we're expecting at least one more in Adelaide as part of Labor's 2025 election commitment. This will support the mental health and wellbeing of mothers and families during and after their pregnancies, a particularly vulnerable time. These mental health services are in addition to the other facilities currently being built in Boothby. We have a statewide eating-disorder centre which will be established at the Repat hospital in Daw Park, at the very heart of Boothby, providing round-the-clock treatment and outpatient services for those living with an eating disorder. Now close to completion, we're rebuilding and expanding the inpatient mental health service at the Margaret Tobin Centre at Flinders Medical Centre. When completed, it will be able to accommodate 48 mental health beds, including 12 brand-new beds up in the psychiatric intensive care unit. The Albanese Labor government will also invest $500 million in 20 youth specialist care centres across the country to support young Australians with complex mental health needs, including personality disorders, eating disorders and early psychosis. This is part of the government's plan to fill what the experts have called 'the missing middle', ensuring that young Australians whose mental health issues warrant neither a GP visit nor hospitalisation can also receive specialist care. On 1 January next year, the government will launch the National Early Intervention Service, which will provide over-the-phone and online support from trained mental health professionals for those with mild to moderate mental health needs. It will be a free service. You won't need a referral. You won't have to pay a gap fee. We're expecting that this service will support around 150,000 people every year. The Albanese Labor government's historic $1.1 billion package to fund mental health services across this country reflects Labor's long-held commitment to the idea that an affordable and accessible public health service is for the benefit of all Australians and our community. Our expansion of mental health services under Medicare will relieve the pressure on subsidised private psychologists, allowing them to work more efficiently and effectively to support those with moderate to high mental health needs. To relieve this pressure further, the government will build up our mental health workforce by funding more than 4,000 psychology scholarships, internships and training places. This will mean more psychology places at universities and more training places for mental health professionals, including for psychiatrists, psychologists and peer workers. The government will also professionalise the peer workforce, establishing a new peer workforce association and undertaking a census of all peer workers. When I worked in mental health for SA Health, we were the first to implement peer workers, and it's great to see this important skilled workforce valued appropriately. They've proven to be invaluable in providing peer support and advocacy across a range of mental health settings. Significantly, from 1 November this year, the government will expand the eligibility for bulk-billing incentives to all Medicare patients and will create an additional incentive payment for general practices that choose to fully bulk-bill, because the GP is often the first point of contact for those seeking professional advice on a mental health issue. We aim for nine out of 10 GP visits to be bulk-billed by 2030. Mental health can be treated as a chronic disease, and GPs are a really important part of maintaining good mental health and preventing relapses, but only if they're affordable and only if the medications are affordable. The metaphor of 'the black dog' is often invoked when speaking of depression, one of the most common mental illnesses in our community. The black dog is a companion who is extremely difficult to shake off. It can wake you up in the morning. It disturbs your sleep at night. It literally dogs your every move, casts a shadow on every activity, drains your joy, drains your energy and makes everything a little darker, a little greyer, a little more difficult. It craves your attention during the quieter moments of your day and barks even more loudly when it thinks your attention has strayed. We all have friends, family and colleagues—maybe even ourselves—who have been stalked by their own black dog. It's not easy, but it is possible to keep the black dog at bay. Many in our community live satisfying and productive lives, managing mental illness as a chronic disease. That's why the Albanese Labor government's groundbreaking investment in a national infrastructure of mental healthcare workforce and services is so vital. It will ensure that all Australians—no matter their age, no matter the severity of their condition, no matter their financial circumstances—are able to get the mental health support they need whenever they need it and wherever they need it. Thank you.
Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How is the Albanese Labor government helping to tackle gender based violence?
Mental Health | Private Members' Business | House debates
Australia's in the midst of a mental health crisis, and I'm not going to play partisan politics on such a serious issue. The statistics are stark. One in five Australians between the ages of 16...
Australia's in the midst of a mental health crisis, and I'm not going to play partisan politics on such a serious issue. The statistics are stark. One in five Australians between the ages of 16 and 85 experiences a mental illness every year. One in two Australians will experience a mental illness at some point in their lives. Unfortunately, South Australia is no exception. One in five South Australians experiences a mental illness every year, and 43 per cent of South Australians will experience a mental illness at some point in their lives. Chances are that you know somebody with a mental illness. It may be you. Yet, Australians are more likely to seek professional help for a common cold than we are for a mental illness. That's why Mental Health Month, which we marked in October, and Perinatal Mental Health Week, which we mark this week, are so important in bringing awareness to this health crisis. It is a crisis that has long been underprioritised, underfunded and underappreciated when it comes to government support. The Albanese Labor government is changing all that, with an unprecedented $1.1 billion in investment in expanding and enhancing Medicare mental health services across the community and across the country, providing tailored and targeted support for all Australians and their mental health needs that is, crucially, accessible and affordable. The Albanese Labor government understands that mental health care is a right, not a privilege. The numbers speak for themselves: 91 Medicare Mental Health Centres offering a free walk-in service delivered by a multidisciplinary team; 20 perinatal mental health centres for new and expectant parents; 17 Medicare Mental Health Kids Hubs providing early intervention support for children under the age of 12 and their families; 203 headspace services for young Australians between the ages of 12 and 25; 20 youth specialist centres for young Australians with complex needs; support for an expected 150,000 people with mild to moderate mental illness each year, with a Medicare mental health check-in, a free non-referral service over the phone and online, led by trained mental health professionals; and funding for more than 4,000 psychology scholarships, internships and training places. In Marion, in my electorate of Boothby, we have an excellent headspace service that is much used. Next month we will welcome a Medicare Mental Health Kids Hub in the Marion GP Plus Health Care Centre. A Medicare Mental Health Centre will also be established in this area. Work on a perinatal mental health centre is currently underway in Elizabeth in northern Adelaide, and we can expect at least one more perinatal mental health centre in Adelaide as part of Labor's 2025 election commitment. A new statewide eating disorder service will be built at the Repat Health Precinct in Daw Park, in the very heart of Boothby, providing inpatient and outpatient treatment for people living with an eating disorder. We're rebuilding and expanding the inpatient mental health service at the Margaret Tobin mental health centre at Flinders, which, when completed, will be able to accommodate 48 mental health beds, including 12 brand new beds in the psychiatric intensive care unit. The metaphor of the black dog is often used to describe the experience of depression. While for many of us a dog is our loyal companion, the black dog of depression refers to a dark shadow that accompanies you morning and night. It interrupts your sleep. It craves your attention during the quieter hours of the day and barks even more loudly when your attention has strayed. It's the shadow on your joy, the shadow on every activity. It undermines your focus, saps your energy. Chances are, we all know somebody who is being stalked by their own black dog. Chances are, there are people in this chamber, in our offices, in our families and in our homes who know the black dog or other forms of mental illness. The black dog can be kept at bay. Mental illness can be treated. As with all illness, often early intervention leads to a better outcome. That's why the Albanese Labor government's historic investment in the national infrastructure of mental health care is so vital. It will ensure that all Australians, no matter their age, the severity of their condition or their financial circumstances, can get the mental health support they need, wherever they need it and whenever they need it. I commend the motion to the House.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
They say the culture you grow up with, in your childhood and teenage years, will always be the culture that speaks to you. I was lucky enough to be a child and teenager in the late seventies and...
They say the culture you grow up with, in your childhood and teenage years, will always be the culture that speaks to you. I was lucky enough to be a child and teenager in the late seventies and early eighties. This was an era when the rest of the world discovered Australian culture. It was an era of fantastic Australian bands, and it was an era that spawned so many iconic Australian movies and TV shows. There was Picnic at Hanging Rock. Who can forget Miranda? There was Mad Max, the franchise that launched Mel Gibson—sorry! There was Breaker Morant, We of the Never Never, Dogs in Space, Crocodile Dundee'That's not a knife!'—Puberty Blues, The Lighthorsemen and Gallipoli. And on TV there were the soapies. There was Neighbours. Everyone stayed home for Scott and Charlene's wedding. There was Molly's death on A Country Practice. There was Home and Away, The Young Doctors, Prisoner, The Big Gig, The Comedy Company and The D Generation. Australian producers, writers and artists were churning out high-quality television and movie content showcasing Australian stories, Australian humour and Australian culture. They gave jobs to Australians: writers, actors, directors, producers, camera operators, costume designers, set designers and so many more. Also, importantly, we were seeing Australian stories and Australian actors on screen and hearing Australian accents. There had been a bit of cultural cringe prior to this era. We tended to import our culture, in particular from England and increasingly from America. Then suddenly we, the Australian industry, were kicking goals around the world. Our stories and our actors were not only on our screens; they were being exported to the world, and suddenly people in New York and London were watching our stories. We should never underestimate how important it is for Australians to see themselves on screen. It helps us to better understand ourselves, our neighbours and our community, and it allows the world to see us and understand us a little better. Australian stories play an important role in shaping Australia's national identity, fostering social inclusion and encouraging cultural expression. Humans are hardwired to understand the world through stories. They are our greatest cultural asset. They build a sense of community, identity, collective wellbeing and shared identity. They reflect and define who we are as a nation and make us recognisable on the international stage. Australian stories help make sense of our past, define ourselves in the present and promote Australia—our people, our creativity and our country—to the world. They bring us together with shared understandings and enable the exchange of experiences, ideas and perspectives. All Australians benefit when we are represented by and can hear our voices in the stories brought to the big and small screens. It makes us proud of who we are. But the way we consume media has very much changed since the 1980s. Major structural changes in the way media is provided to us has meant audience viewing habits have changed. Australian audiences, like audiences around the world, are increasingly engaging with content across multiple platforms. Public broadcasters, commercial broadcasters, cable and streaming are all part of Australia's television landscape now and will be into the future. We are less likely to watch free-to-air television and live broadcasts. We are less likely to go to the movies in a cinema. We are more likely to be watching on-demand streaming services. And the shows we are being offered have changed as well. They are more likely to be relatively cheap-to-make reality TV shows or programs imported from overseas, known as global content, because it's cheaper to buy up the international rights and show the same programs around the world wherever the streaming service has a presence. It's cultural colonialism, where we are all absorbing the same stories and the same standards, becoming homogenous with the cultures of the sending countries, and this undermines the special uniqueness that is Australia and Australian society in all its many forms. In 2023, this government released the national cultural policy, Revive: a place for every story, a story for every place. It was the first national cultural policy in a decade. As one of the five pillars of this policy, the Australian government committed to introduce requirements for Australian screen content on streaming services to ensure continued access to local stories and content. Today the Albanese Labor government is legislating for streaming services and subscription services to have guaranteed Australian content. Public broadcasters already have this requirement. The ABC charter includes the requirement for the ABC to broadcast programs that contribute to Australia's sense of national identity, that inform and entertain and that reflect the cultural diversity of the community. The SBS charter states that the SBS's principal function is 'to provide multilingual and multicultural broadcasting and digital media services that inform, educate and entertain all Australians and, in doing so, reflect Australia's multicultural society'. Australian commercial television stations had their first content quotas for commercial television introduced in the 1960s to ensure that Australians had access to stories and to see their culture, language and values reflected on the screen. These local content requirements were updated in the 1990s to apply to free-to-air and other subscription television broadcasters, requiring broadcasters to commission a minimum level of Australian content every year. This is based on either hours, in the case of free-to-air commercial television broadcasters, or, in the case of other subscription broadcasters, a percentage of their total drama expenditure in Australia. These requirements stabilise the market and act as a safeguard for the Australian screen production sector. But, unlike free-to-air broadcasting services and other subscription television services, streaming services currently have no requirements to make Australian content available on their platforms. The ready availability of cheap content produced in other countries risks drowning out Australian stories. Without government intervention, there is no guarantee that streaming services will produce Australian content and make it available to Australian consumers. There are streaming services operating here in Australia that currently have zero Australian content. Without Australian stories, Australian voices and Australian content, our country will be poorer, our society will be poorer and, certainly, our creative industries will be poorer. The Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025 amends the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and subordinate legislation to allow for an Australian screen content requirement on subscription video-on-demand streaming services. It will mandate that streaming services with more than one million Australian subscribers invest at least 10 per cent of their total program expenditure for Australia on eligible program formats in Australia and on new Australian programs. Eligible program formats are drama, children's programs, documentary, arts and educational programs. The requirement uses the definition of Australian content which is set out in the Broadcasting Services (Australian Content and Children's Television) Standards 2020. This is the definition that is already used for commercial free-to-air and other subscription television broadcasters, and it's therefore the appropriate, consistent definition. The requirement also includes a voluntary option for streaming services to acquit their requirements based on a calculation of 7½ per cent of their Australian revenue. Streaming services can acquit their obligation over a three-year period. This principle was put strongly to the government by the streaming services during the extensive consultation and reflects the lumpy nature of investment cycles in high-quality programs. There will also be a statutory review conducted four years after the commencement to make sure the requirement is operating effectively. This obligation will give vital support to our domestic screen sector and arts workers by ensuring quality local stories. The proposed requirement we are debating today is consistent with Australia's international trade obligations. Streaming services covered by the new requirements will report to ACMA, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, which will administer the Australian screen content requirement. The Australian government committed to ensuring Australians have access to local stories wherever they choose to watch their screen content, and this bill fulfils that commitment. Since their introduction in Australia, streaming services have created some extraordinary shows. In the last few years, many of them have produced great Australian content. A minority, however, are yet to produce any. This legislation is not a criticism of the streaming businesses in Australia; it's an endorsement of Australian stories, a celebration of Australian creatives and a show of respect for the Australian audience. This bill will guarantee Australians will have access to Australian stories now and into the future. It will ensure that, no matter what remote you're holding, Australian stories will be at your fingertips. Australians will see themselves and know each other, and the world will meet us. I commend the bill to the House.
Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
A lot has happened since the member for New England proposed this motion to the House. We now know that the party the member may or may not be a member of—the Nationals—has rejected...
A lot has happened since the member for New England proposed this motion to the House. We now know that the party the member may or may not be a member of—the Nationals—has rejected net zero. We also know that their partner in coalition—the Liberal Party—has obediently followed suit, sort of. They tried to have a bet each way, with the opposition leader saying they were abandoning net zero but that somehow they were going to stay in the Paris Agreement while also going against the entire principles of the agreement, no matter what their talking points say. Their commitment to reducing emissions only goes as far as entertaining it as a possible outcome that would be 'welcome' but certainly not worth trying to achieve. That all sounds very confusing and like a word salad that's trying to please everybody or at least not offend anybody—but, of course, it really fails to do anything. But fear not: it must be a real policy because they've also released a glossy leaflet! It's full of dot points of lovely motherhood statements that sound great but have 'net zero' detail on how they intend to achieve them. There's no detail on addressing the shortfall in energy caused by 24 of the 28 coal fired power plants announcing their closures under the Morrison government with nothing done to replace them—nada. There's no detail on addressing the unreliability of ageing coal fired power plants that their owners know are uneconomic to repair or replace—zilch. There's no detail on addressing the lack of market interest in investing in coal fired or nuclear powered stations—zip. There's no detail on addressing the costs of energy for households or businesses that will be made worse by going away from the cheapest form of energy generation and instead backing more expensive forms of energy generation that need major capital injections—nil. Bizarrely, this reminded me of the TV series South Park. Stay with me, and I'll give you a brief synopsis to explain. It's an episode called 'The underpants gnomes'. Our heroes, Cartman, Stan, Kyle and Kenny—you pick who is whom—meet another boy who insists the gnomes are stealing his underpants. It turns out that he's right. Our heroes trace the gnomes back to their cave, where they can see the cunning plan. On the wall is a chart. One the left, it says, 'Step 1: steal underpants.' On the right, it says, 'Step 3: profit.' And, in the middle, next to step 2, is a large question mark. That's pretty much the coalition's energy plan in three easy steps. Step 1 is get rid of net zero—tick! Step 3 has the possibility of 'welcome' outcomes. Step 2 has a big question mark. But don't you worry your pretty little head about it; it's all good. Here, look at this glossy brochure! While this refers to their lack of energy plan, there is also a complete lack of plan to deal with climate change. The irony is that the coalition seats are largely based in rural and regional areas—some of the areas most at risk from the impacts of climate change. They are represented by people who don't believe in climate change or don't understand the science or are not willing to do anything about it or all three. Droughts, floods, cyclones, increasingly powerful and more frequent storms, algal blooms and marine die-offs as we have seen in South Australia—these affect us all, but they particularly affect farmers, aquaculture, commercial fishing and tourism, which are all largely based in the regions. The flow-on effects are felt by the towns and regional communities that support them. Those opposite say they understand the science of climate change, but what are they going to say to their communities about their lack of action on climate change? A lack of a target or plan shows they don't care. It isn't a priority. To say, 'If it does happen, it would be welcome,' is an insulting crumb thrown from the table to keep the supplicants quiet. To those who say they care about the costs of electricity, what will you say to the households, businesses and industries in their electorates about a credible way to replace the energy generation that left the system under your watch or announced its imminent closure under your watch? When the evidence is there that coal and gas are an expensive form of generation and that nuclear is the most expensive form of generation for a country like Australia, how can they seriously look at the renewables transformation already well underway and say they want to stop progress? Will they look in the eyes of the next generation—our children, our grandchildren—and show them a glossy brochure with no substance, no plans, no targets and only the meaningless word 'welcome'? How insulting!
Albanese Government | Statements by Members | House debates
What has the Albanese Labor government been doing over the past six months? I'm glad you asked. We've legislated payday super. We've set a climate target of 62-70 per cent emissions reduction by...
What has the Albanese Labor government been doing over the past six months? I'm glad you asked. We've legislated payday super. We've set a climate target of 62-70 per cent emissions reduction by 2035. Over 111 large-scale renewable projects have been approved, and a further 29 projects are in the pipeline. We expanded the five per cent home guarantee scheme to make it easier to buy your own home. We cut HECS debts by 20 per cent. We legislated to protect penalty rates and overtime rates. We've introduced the home battery subsidy scheme, and now over 110,000 additional Australian homes have a battery. We announced the solar sharer scheme so all Australians can benefit from renewable energy. We delivered dignity into our aged care system and made the system sustainable. We put $8.5 billion into bulk-billing, and from 1 January you'll only pay $25 for a prescription on the PBS. And today we're debating the EPBC Act to fix our broken environmental laws. Meanwhile, those opposite squabble amongst themselves. They split, get back together again, threaten to split again and discuss the PM's T-shirt choices. I know some of my colleagues here are Swifties, but I'm an eighties girl. On this side of the House, our theme song is Queen's 'Don't Stop Me Now'. On that side, it's The Clash's 'Should I stay or Should I Go'.
Albanese Government | Adjournment | House debates
Yesterday marked six months since the re-election of the Albanese Labor government. We went to the election with a suite of policies and proposals, and already we've hit the ground running. In...
Yesterday marked six months since the re-election of the Albanese Labor government. We went to the election with a suite of policies and proposals, and already we've hit the ground running. In just six months we've set an ambitious and achievable climate target of 62 to 70 per cent emissions reduction by 2035, helping us deliver net zero by 2050. Over 111 large-scale renewable projects have already been approved—enough to power 13 million homes—and a further 29 projects are in the pipeline for approval. We've made it easier for first home buyers to purchase a home by expanding the Home Guarantee Scheme. This means first home buyers need only a five per cent deposit to get out of the rental market and into the property market, starting to build their own equity instead of paying someone else's mortgage. We've cut HECS debts by 20 per cent, and over the next couple of weeks those with HECS debts will start getting messages from the ATO telling them the 20 per cent reduction has been applied to their debt. We passed Baby Priya's bill, which enables parents experiencing the worst moment of their life—the stillbirth or death of a baby—to have the time and space to grieve before returning to work. We legislated to protect penalty and overtime rates—hard to believe this was necessary, but apparently it was. If you work irregular, unsociable or long hours, you should be paid for the inconvenience and impact it has on your life. This is the Australian way of fair work. We introduced the home battery subsidy scheme, and, to date, in the less than four months since it has become operational, over 110,000 home batteries have been installed. That's over 110,000 Australian homes now enjoying cheap or free electricity. Today we announced the Solar Sharer scheme. Because of the amazing uptake of solar panels and batteries and renewables generally, electricity has a negative price in the middle of the day. The Solar Sharer scheme will enable people in my home state of South Australia, New South Wales and South-East Queensland to enjoy three hours of free electricity in the middle of the day, starting 1 July next year. Whether you have solar panels or not, you can also benefit from the cheapest form of electricity—renewables. We've delivered reform to our aged-care system, ensuring dignity for older Australians. We know the aged-care system has not been fit for purpose for a long time. We have an ageing population, with more and more demand on aged-care and home supports, yet no new beds have been built in years. The new Aged Care Act puts the older person at the centre of the system with a rights based system and ensures aged care will be sustainable in the future. We strengthened Medicare with the largest-ever investment of $8.5 billion to ensure nine out of 10 GP visits are bulk-billed by 2030. This started on 1 November, and over a thousand GP practices across the country have signed up already to be fully bulk-billing. I'm aware of at least four in Boothby, and that's in addition to those who were previously bulk-billing. We passed legislation to ensure that, from 1 January, people will only pay $25 for a prescription on the PBS. There's not much point in getting a prescription if you can't afford to fill it and take the medicine regularly. We've listed more contraceptives on the PBS so women have more choice. Today we've been debating our reforms to the EPBC Act—groundbreaking reforms that deliver on all the recommendations of the 2020 Samuel review. They establish a national environmental protection agency and reform the broken offsets mechanism, which I know so many of my local constituents in Boothby have raised concerns with me about. These bills will deliver protection for the environment, fast decisions and certainty for business, industry, developers and investors. It's received the approval of Professor Samuel and former secretary of the Treasury Ken Henry. Locally we've opened the redeveloped Marino Community Hall—fantastic. We've opened the on-off ramp at Majors Road, and the tram overpasses are progressing at pace. A couple of weeks ago the tunnel borer for the North-South Corridor arrived. Australians voted for a government with vision and purpose, a government with a proven track record of delivering for the Australian people. Australians voted for a government that would listen and deliver, and, six months on, that's exactly what we're doing.
Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
On the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 and associated bills—one of the major reasons I chose, in 2021, to give up a really meaningful job with St Vincent de Paul in South Australia...
On the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 and associated bills—one of the major reasons I chose, in 2021, to give up a really meaningful job with St Vincent de Paul in South Australia and spend 10 months campaigning unpaid was the appalling record of the previous Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government on climate and the environment. This was a government who, in concert with the then SA Liberal environment minister, David Speirs, sabotaged the Murray-Darling Basin Plan to the detriment of South Australia's water security, our environment, our regional communities and our downstream agriculture. They cut funding to the environment by 40 per cent. They teamed up with the Greens political party to axe climate laws that would have seen Australia reaping the economic and environmental benefits of having cut emissions via an efficient market driven mechanism. The one thing they actually did well for the environment was the 2020 Samuel review, commissioned by the now opposition leader during her tenure as environment minister. Then they promptly ignored it. Professor Samuel says now that he's bitterly disappointed with their current position. Join the queue, Professor Samuel. Disappointing Australia seems to be the forte of the Liberal and National parties—a natural talent, if you will. What I learned from campaigning in 2021 and 2022 was that I was not alone in Boothby in my sense of frustration about the then coalition government's lack of action and, indeed, actual sabotage of the environment. They had two record-breaking election losses in a row, but those opposite seem still not to be listening to what the Australian public is telling them or what the environment's telling them—or business, developers and investors. The current environment laws are broken. They don't adequately protect the environment. But they also don't work for business developers or investors. We now have the opportunity to fix our broken environment laws. We have the opportunity to protect our environment, which we depend upon for our Australian way of life. We have the opportunity to make these laws work for business, developers and investors so that they have certainty for investment, so they can get to a fast 'yes' or a fast 'no' without wasting time or money on investments that are never going to come off. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to fix these laws and protect our environment, and we've waited too long already. The best time to have done this was perhaps a couple of decades ago. The second-best time was half a decade ago, when the Samuel report was delivered to the previous coalition government. The third-best time is now. Labor is the party of the environment. Labor has delivered every single major environmental reform in Australia's history—Landcare; saving the Franklin; protecting the Daintree and Kakadu; building the largest network of marine parks in the world; and meaningfully addressing the threat of climate change. Since 2022, the Albanese Labor government has passed strong laws to force big polluters to cut emissions, so that Australia gets to net zero carbon pollution by 2050. We have reduced Australia's emissions by 29 per cent below 2005 levels already, and we're on track for 43 per cent by 2030. We have committed to 82 per cent renewable energy by 2030, and we're well on the way. Already 18 gigawatts of renewable generation capacity has been installed across Australia since we were elected in 2022. We have approved 111 renewable energy projects, producing enough electricity to power more than 13 million homes, and we have approved a further 29 projects. We've protected an extra 95 million hectares of Australian ocean and land, expanding marine parks around Macquarie, Heard and McDonald islands. We've established Environment Information Australia, to give the public and business easier access to the latest environmental data. We've doubled the funding to better look after national parks, including Kakadu and Uluru. We've doubled the Indigenous Rangers Program. We've invested over $600 million to better protect our threatened plants and animals and to tackle feral animals and weeds. And we've invested $200 million to clean up our rivers. We've increased recycling capacity by more 1.4 million tonnes a year, diverting recyclables from landfill. We've established the world's first nature repair market, making it easier to invest in nature restoration. And of course let's not forget that our home battery scheme has delivered over 110,000 additional batteries in just over four months. We've given the safeguard mechanism teeth, requiring net emission reductions from our 215 biggest emitters of five per cent a year—equivalent to taking two-thirds of the cars off the road by 2030. And we've brought in new vehicle emission standards, giving Australians more choice of cheaper-to-run cars. We've legislated to bring the Climate Change Authority back, to play a meaningful role in advising government. We've put net zero in the objects of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and in the Australian Renewable Energy Agency Act and made it relevant to other key agencies, such as Infrastructure Australia and Export Finance Australia. Now, I know the concept of net zero is triggering for those opposite, but you can't say you understand the science of climate change, the impacts it's already having on our planet and our country, and what it will do in the future, if you then turn around and say, 'We want to slow down any action and turn a target into an "ambition".' That brings me to this bill. The Environment Protection Reform Bill delivers modern, fit-for-purpose, national environment laws that ensure big gains for both the environment and business. The Albanese Labor government is committed to reforming our national environment laws to deliver stronger environmental protections, reduce duplication and boost accountability and transparency in decision-making. It has been five long years since Professor Graeme Samuel tabled his report for the former environment minister Sussan Ley, and our laws remain broken. They aren't working for the environment, they aren't working for business or industry and they aren't working for investors. Our unique natural environment is irreplaceable, and we owe it to our children and our grandchildren to do everything we can to protect it. But the Samuel review told us that the environment is going backwards. These reforms that we're presenting today are based on the recommendations from Professor Samuel in his 2020 report. Professor Samuel himself has publicly backed this bill as meeting all of the recommendations in his report. These laws are a targeted and balanced package of reforms to the EPBC Act centred on three key pillars. Stronger environmental protection and restoration— (Quorum formed) As I was saying, I know that net zero is very triggering for those opposite, but you can't say that you understand climate science and that you understand and care about the impact that's happening on our planet and our country if you then turn around and say you want to slow down any action and turn a target into an ambition. These stronger environmental protection and restoration laws won't just deliver better protections for our special places but restore and regenerate them for future generations, which those opposite clearly don't care about. More efficient and robust project assessments and approvals will allow us to better respond to and deliver on national priorities that work for the betterment of our country, like the renewable energy transition, a future made in Australia and the housing that we need, which those opposite don't seem to understand. It will also give business, industry and investors the certainty of a fast yes or a fast no for their proposals, and accountability and transparency in decision-making to give all Australians confidence in these laws. And, of course, most notably, these laws will establish Australia's first-ever independent environmental protection agency, which will be a strong, independent regulator with a clear focus on ensuring better compliance with and stronger enforcement of Australia's new environmental laws. The reforms will also allow the environment minister to make national environment standards, standards that will set boundaries for decisions to ensure they deliver improved environmental outcomes. The standards will protect the environment, give business clear rules and help decision-makers be fair and consistent. I know that my electorate of Boothby will be particularly interested in the remake of the environment offset system. Sometimes projects can harm the environment in ways that can't be avoided, and, when this happens, steps must be taken to compensate or make up for that damage—an environmental offset. The offset could take the form of an action, a payment or both. I constantly hear from people very concerned that the current offsets regime is not effective and has enabled polluters to consider paying for cheap and ineffective offsets as a cost of doing business that they're willing to pay. Under the new system, projects will be required in the first instance, by law, to avoid, mitigate or repair damage to protected matters where possible. Any residual significant impacts on nationally protected matters must be fully offset to achieve a net gain for the environment. They must leave the environment better off. The current legislation requires no net loss, so moving to a net gain for the environment is a massive step forward. A net gain could be achieved either by the proponent delivering directly on an offset—a new and improved offset that is a real offset—or through an upfront financial contribution to a restoration fund. Proposed reforms will introduce new options for offsetting. Projects proponents can deliver an offset themselves or pay for the government to do it via a restoration contribution payment—or a combination of both. The proposed changes will also allow certain biodiversity certificates, issued under the Nature Repair Market, to be used for environmental offsetting, and this helps ensure that there are enough environmental offsets to provide real, lasting environmental benefits. Part of the clarity the EPBC bill will bring includes a clear understanding of go and no-go zones. The reforms will include a new definition of unacceptable impact specific to each protected matter. This will set clear and upfront criteria for impacts that cannot be approved unless the project meets the national interest test. It will increase transparency, consistency and certainty of decisions. This applies to protected matters under the EPBC Act, including World Heritage areas, threatened species and wetlands of international importance. Now, we'd like to think that all players in this area would value our environment—that they'd do the right thing; however, we do live in the real world. The Samuel review recognised that, for some bad actors, breaching the law is just the cost of doing business, so the reforms increase the penalties for the most serious and significant breaches of legislation, and they allow courts to respond proportionately to the most egregious breaches. I'm so pleased that we've introduced this EPBC bill. This is really important legislation. This is legislation that my electorate—and in fact all of Australia—has been waiting for for too long. It responds fully to the recommendations of the Samuel review. It's legislation that the environment needs and that business, industry and developers need; it's legislation that this country needs. I commend the bill to the House.
Aged Care | Private Members' Business | House debates
I move: That this House: (1) notes: (a) that on 1 November, the Government's once-in-a-generation reforms to aged care began, giving more older Australians and their loved ones better access to a...
I move: That this House: (1) notes: (a) that on 1 November, the Government's once-in-a-generation reforms to aged care began, giving more older Australians and their loved ones better access to a system that puts safe, high quality and dignified care at its core; and (b) the Aged Care Act 2024 and related reforms deliver a range of improvements to ensure older people and their needs are at the centre of the new aged care system including: (i) strengthened aged care quality standards; (ii) a statement of rights; (iii) a new model for supported decision-making; and (iv) introducing the Support at Home program to help older Australians remain in their homes for longer; and (2) acknowledges that the commencement of the Aged Care Act 2024 is the next step in the Government's aged care reforms, which has already included: (a) the introduction of star ratings; (b) more direct care for over 250,000 older people in aged care homes; (c) 24-hours, seven days a week nursing in aged care homes; (d) higher wages for aged care workers; (e) a new single assessment system; and (f) more transparency on provider finances and operations. When the Albanese government was elected, one of our priorities was fixing the broken aged-care system. Nothing explained better how broken aged care was than the 2019 interim report from the royal commission into aged care, entitled simply Neglect. The royal commission final report was delivered two years later, in March 2021, and woefully little was done to address the catalogue of horror stories the royal commission had heard. By mid-2022, the previous coalition government had responded to fewer than 10 of the 148 recommendations. We all heard the heartbreaking stories the royal commission was told of how older people—our parents, our grandparents, our neighbours and our friends—had been treated, and this government was the one to stand up and say that we can and must do better The New Aged Care Act, which came into force over the weekend, responds to 58 of the 148 recommendations. This means that this Albanese government will have now responded in part or in full to 103 of the royal commission's recommendations, and, of course, the work continues. These generational reforms to aged care are really important for every older Australian and their families, carers and providers. Australia has an ageing population, and we know that there will be increased demand on the aged-care system. We owe it to every older Australian to ensure that, when they need aged care, it will be there for them. Over the past three years, we have already introduced some very important improvements to the sector. We mandated 24/7 registered nursing in every nursing home, delivering more care minutes to residents. There is now a registered nurse on site in aged care more than 99 per cent of the time, delivering more direct care for over 250,000 older Australians. Our reforms are giving older Australians 7.1 million additional minutes of care every single day compared to under the last government. This is a great initiative to keep people healthy in their nursing home, their home, and also to avoid inappropriate transfers to hospital EDs for minor ailments and injuries. We have already invested $17.7 billion to increase the wages of aged-care workers. Ultimately, the care you receive in a nursing home or aged-care facility is a direct product of the quality of the staffing. This government values the critical role workers play in this sector. We want aged care to be a career of choice, attracting and retaining quality workers who love providing care to other humans, who love aged care. Too often we heard that good carers and nurses were having to leave the sector because they couldn't afford their mortgage on aged-care wages or because they could get better pay somewhere else. Increases in aged-care workers' wages means they can pursue the career they love in the aged-care sector, providing quality care to residents. Most importantly, we've improved the standard of care. In December 2023, only 54 per cent of aged-care homes had an overall star rating of four or five stars, which is good or excellent. Today, 79 per cent of homes do. Thanks to our reforms, older Australians are now receiving more care and better quality care under Labor. Now the New Aged Care Act is underway, we'll continue to make sure residential aged care is meeting the demand of an ageing Australian population and delivering truly equitable, sustainable and high-quality care. We know people want to stay at home, and the new act is making sure that they can do that with dignity, safety and quality support. But, when they need extra care, we'll make sure a bed is there for them. And it's important to note that the new act isn't just more of the status quo; it's better care for more older Australians. It puts them at the centre of their decision-making. It's a rights based framework. The act's statement of rights makes sure that older people can make decisions about their own lives and have their decisions not just accepted but respected. It's more support at home, including bigger budgets and separate streams for home modifications and assistive technology. And, of course, it's a transformational change in residential care, with places now being delivered to people not homes. This will allow older people and their families to get the care they want where they want it, closer to the people they love. Older Australians deserve the very best, and that requires transformational change. We'll continue to be responsive to older Australians who need more supports, whether that's specialist memory support services, mental health care or care for those living in regional areas. It's better care for more older Australians that puts them at the centre of their decision-making.
Vocational Education and Training | Questions without Notice | House debates
My question is to the Minister for Skills and Training. How is the Albanese Labor government breaking down barriers so Australians can get the skills they want in the jobs that we need? What has...
My question is to the Minister for Skills and Training. How is the Albanese Labor government breaking down barriers so Australians can get the skills they want in the jobs that we need? What has been the response?
Raise Our Voice in Parliament | Statements by Members | House debates
Raise Our Voice in Parliament is a national competition where students from high school and primary school put in speeches for their local member to read out in parliament. Boothby had a bumper...
Raise Our Voice in Parliament is a national competition where students from high school and primary school put in speeches for their local member to read out in parliament. Boothby had a bumper crop this year, and the one that I have chosen to speak on is from Ella, who is 10 years old, from Mitcham Primary School, which was also one of the schools that Julia Gillard attended. Ella writes: Laws aren't just words on a page. They shape how we live every day—our rights, our responsibilities, and the opportunities we have. That's why we need to learn about civics and democracy from a young age. If schools taught us more about how Parliament works, how to vote, and how to speak up for what we believe in, we would grow into citizens who care about fairness and equality. Learning these skills now means we will be ready to lead and make good choices for Australia's future. Another step is creating more opportunities for young people to volunteer. Even though we are kids, we can already make a real difference—helping our neighbours, caring for the environment, or supporting charities. Volunteering teaches us teamwork, kindness, and responsibility. But often, we are told we are too young or not given the chance. The government should support programs that make it easier for children and teenagers to get involved, so we can start contributing today. We have a lot to contribute. By giving us stronger civics education and more chances to volunteer, the government would be building a generation ready to care, to serve, and shape a better tomorrow.
Truman, Ms Elizabeth Robyn | Constituency Statements | House debates
I rise to pay my respects to Elizabeth Robyn Truman, nee Harvey—known to her friends and family and colleagues as Liz—who died on 24 May 2025. Liz was the second member for Hawker, an...
I rise to pay my respects to Elizabeth Robyn Truman, nee Harvey—known to her friends and family and colleagues as Liz—who died on 24 May 2025. Liz was the second member for Hawker, an electorate now largely absorbed by Boothby. She was the second Labor woman to be elected to the federal House of Representatives from South Australia as a member of the Hawke Labor government between 1987 and 1990. But her legacy within the party was much longer, most notably as a member of the Women's Policy Committee, campaigning for better representation for women. I'm sure she would have been ecstatic that the ALP now has a majority female caucus in federal parliament. We truly stand on the shoulders of legends like Liz. Liz was a compassionate and dedicated local member. She spoke in her first speech of the importance of social housing, support for Vietnam veterans, single parents, people with disability and women escaping domestic violence. Interestingly, in April 1989, she issued a press release entitled 'Councils must plan for greenhouse effect,' talking about the impact on coastal communities of sea level rises, higher tides, storm damage, as well as changes in rainfall patterns, flooding and soil erosion—things we're starting to see now. Liz lost the 1990 election by 14 votes, which must have been heartbreaking. Liz was known to her family and friends as an incredibly intelligent and creative woman who had a talent for languages, a passion for dance, loved to travel and, beyond anything, loved to teach. Her original career choice was ballet dancer, but, after leaving Adelaide High School, she received a University of Adelaide scholarship where she completed a BA and then a diploma in secondary teaching from Adelaide Teachers College. She taught languages at Elizabeth High School and was then selected for a pioneering 'English as a second language' intensive college at Gilles Street Primary School. Liz's flair for language and her interest in culture led her to live and travel around the world, teaching in Madrid and Oman, living in Argentina, Patagonia and travelling through Europe and the Middle East. She turned her creative flair and experience in parliament into a series of stories, originally published online as 'Snowflakes Hope' and then as 'The Glasshouse Effect'. I've been unable to locate a copy of the book; however, I believe it included profiles of Bob Hawke, Paul Keating, John Button, Neal Blewett and Barry Jones, as well as a very unflattering description of the typical senator. She did, however, say that she changed some names to protect the guilty—the mind boggles. Liz is much missed by her partner, Peter; her sons, Stephen and Tom; her grandchildren, Maxwell, Florence and Oliver; her stepchildren, Matt, Jon and Ali and their families; as well as her sister, Verity, a former colleague of mine. Vale, Liz.
Labor Government | Statements by Members | House debates
In the words of a well-known meerkat, 'Compare the market.' On the one hand, we have a government cutting HECS debts, rolling out fee-free TAFE, fully funding public schools for the first time...
In the words of a well-known meerkat, 'Compare the market.' On the one hand, we have a government cutting HECS debts, rolling out fee-free TAFE, fully funding public schools for the first time ever, making housing more affordable for first home buyers and cutting the cost of medicines. On the opposition side, to paraphrase the opposition leader, they believe people don't value anything they haven't paid for. On the one hand, we have a government paying super on paid parental leave, supporting families and addressing an issue that sees older women retiring into poverty. On the other hand, we have a shadow industrial relations minister who washes his hands of the equity issue, saying it isn't his choice that women have children. On the one hand, we have a government that has ticked off over 100 large-scale renewable projects and now more than 80,000 cheaper home batteries for Australian households in just over three months. On the other hand, we have an opposition that, depending on the day, doesn't believe in climate change, does believe in climate change but not in meaningful action, believes in net zero but that we should be going slower, is waiting for the science, believes in non-existent small nuclear reactors or even mobile microreactors, or thinks dumping net zero is the electoral winner it should be adopting. Back to the meerkat, it's 'simples'. This government is working hard for the Australian people, the economy and the country. I'm not sure what those opposite are doing.