The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
Maritime Legislation Amendment Bill 2015
That this bill be now read a second time.
That:
(a) Mr Broad be discharged from the Standing Committee on the Environment and that, in his place, Mr Cobb be appointed a member of the committee, and
(b) Mr Broad be appointed a supplementary member of the committee for the purpose of the inquiry into the Register of Environmental Organisations.
Water Amendment Bill 2015
We will also move an amendment that says that expenditure on farm infrastructure works cannot be used for buybacks, and the total amount of buybacks will be capped at 1,500 gigalitres. That means that the gap that exists between the water that is being bought back now and 2,100 gigalitres, which is a baseline figure that people will, reluctantly, as a second-best solution, accept, is all that can be bought in a market buyback. We will cap the total amount of buybacks at 1,500 gigalitres and we will require that actions to remove constraints and those needed to achieve this potential 450 gigalitres—
recovered under this account must satisfy an improved or a neutral socioeconomic test—in other words, no socioeconomic disadvantage.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Banking Laws Amendment (Unclaimed Money) Bill 2015
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Standing) Bill 2015
The purpose of this statement is to correct media reports about the making of orders by the Court affecting the proposed Carmichael coal mine project.
On 12 January 2015 the Mackay Conservation Group filed an application for judicial review of the decision of the Minister for the Environment made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (the Act) to approve proposed action to develop an open cut and underground coal mine, rail link and associated infrastructure in central Queensland, subject to certain conditions.
On 4 August 2015 a judge of the Court made orders setting aside the Minister’s decision. The orders were not made after a hearing. There was no judgment. There were no findings. The orders were made by consent, that is, with the agreement of the parties to the litigation.
Proposed orders were presented to the Court in a letter from the Australian Government Solicitor (AGS), who acted for the Minister and the Commonwealth. The letter was written with the agreement of the other parties: Mackay Conservation Group and Adani Mining Pty Ltd.
In the case of an agreement by parties to litigation to set aside a decision of the Executive, the Court’s usual practice, known to the parties, is that the Court be informed of the error sufficient to set aside the decision. In this case that was done in the letter from the AGS.
The basis of the parties’ request and the basis upon which the orders were made was that:
1. The Minister found that the proposed action would have a significant impact on two listed threatened species: the Yakka Skink and the Ornamental Snake
2. There were conservation advices approved by the Minister for those two species.
3. Under the terms of s 139(2) of the Act, it was mandatory for the Minister to have regard to the approved conservation advices.
4. In deciding whether or not to approve the proposed action, the Minister did not have regard to the approved conservation advices.
5. The Minister did not have regard to the approved conservation advices because they were not included in the material that was before him at the time he made his decision.
The Adani decision seems to have been caused by either Adani or the department not applying the law properly, but then, suddenly and with no warning or consultation, we get this put forward … we prefer evidence-based policy making.
Third party appeal rights have the potential to deter corrupt approaches by minimising the chance that any favouritism sought will succeed. The absence of third party appeals creates an opportunity for corrupt conduct to occur, as an important disincentive for corrupt decision-making is absent from the planning system.
Our strategy is essentially to 'disrupt and delay' key projects and infrastructure while gradually eroding public and political support for the industry and continually building the power of the movement to win more.
Indeed, the World Heritage Committee not only reversed the direction we inherited of the Great Barrier Reef being on the 'watch list' with a direct path to being placed on the 'in-danger list', it lifted the Great Barrier Reef back to the highest rank of World Heritage listing and praised Australia as a global role model only seven weeks ago.
Our strategy is to 'disrupt and delay' key projects and infrastructure while gradually eroding public and political support for the industry …
…to provide for the protection of the environment, especially those aspects of the environment that are matters of national environmental significance;
While much has been written about the Prime Minister's lack of an agenda, in reality he has a very clear set of goals. Unfortunately for the business community, those goals have more to do with stifling the desires of progressives than the pursuit of the pro-business agenda. Stopping same-sex marriage, spruiking a mine that many banks won't touch and ripping up a market-based emissions abatement mechanism are not 'distractions' for Tony Abbott; they are his raison d'etre.
Since coming into government we have applied the highest environmental standards. We have halved the time for environmental approvals and cleared the backlog of projects left by Labor.
We have approved over $1 trillion in projects and established a one-stop shop for environmental assessments. All while maintaining environmental standards.
I'm gonna convince all of our people to stand together as one people and one voice, and then we're gonna ask all Australian people and people from all over the world to stand with us and unite with us to fight this fight.
Removing this potential scrutiny will encourage both public servants and ministers to be less careful about complying with the law's requirements.
There will be more jobs and higher wages in Australia if the China FTA goes ahead.
The first priority is to get in front of the critical projects to slow them down in the approval process.
…we are using the Australian FTA as part of the structure of an argument as to why we know need to upgrade China's first FTA.
ChAFTA is a high quality agreement that will deepen Australia’s relationship with our biggest trading partner…
It is very exciting to see the free trade agreement that, for the first time takes a really bold step in terms of services.
This free trade agreement will give us the impetus to grow that trade opportunity even further.
There will be more jobs and higher wages in Australia if the China free trade agreement goes ahead.
If the Parliament fails to ratify ChAFTA this year
… … …
This will damage the competitiveness and affordability of all Australian products in China, and set Australian agriculture back $300 million in 2016.
… the China free trade agreement will not allow unrestricted access to the Australian labour market by Chinese workers. It will not allow Australian employment laws or conditions to be undermined, and it will not allow companies to avoid paying Australian wages by using foreign workers.
… employers seeking to sponsor an overseas worker under an IFA Project Agreement must demonstrate a labour market need and prove that Australians have been provided first opportunity through labour market testing …
Upon arrival in Australia, they—
must still obtain any required federal, state or territory licences or registration to commence work, including workplace health and safety. Claims to the contrary are simply wrong.
Nobody seriously thinks that we are entering into this free-trade agreement to create jobs in another country or for foreign workers to come and work here and then go back to their country of origin.
That further statements in relation to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II be permitted in the Federation Chamber.
Report relating to the consideration of private Members' business.
1. The committee met in private session on Tuesday, 8 September 2015.
2. The committee determined the order of precedence and times to be allotted for consideration of private Members' business on Monday, 14 September 2015, as follows:
Items for House of Representatives Chamber (10.10 am to 12 noon)
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
Notices
1 MR KATTER: To present a Bill for an Act to amend the Trade Marks Act 1995 , and for related purposes. (Trade Marks Amendment (Iconic Symbols of National Identity) Bill 2015 ).
( Notice given 18 August 2015. )
Time allotted—10 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mr Katter — 10 minutes.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 1 x 10 mins]
Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes—pursuant to standing order 41.
2 MRS WICKS: To move:
That this House:
(1) places on the record that:
(a) under the previous Government, at the time of the last election just 2 per cent of premises across Australia could access the National Broadband Network (NBN);
(b) since the election the NBN rollout has ramped up significantly and today around one in ten premises can access the NBN and under the NBN's new Corporate Plan, by June 2018, three in four premises will have access to the NBN; and
(2) notes that:
(a) the NBN's 2016-2018 Corporate Plan reveals that a full fibre to the premises (FTTP) NBN could not be completed until 2026 at the earliest and could be as late as 2028—six to eight years later than the current Government's plan;
(b) the NBN 2016-2018 Corporate Plan reveals that a full FTTP NBN would cost between $20 and $30 billion dollars more than the current Government's plan; and
(3) recognises that it is essential to deliver fast broadband to Australians sooner—not force Australians with no or poor broadband to wait more than a decade for the NBN.
( Notice given 7 September 2015. )
Time allotted—30 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mrs Wicks — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
3 MR CHAMPION: To move:
That this House:
(1) notes:
(a) the recent media investigation on the ABC program Four Corners about the abuse of 7‑Eleven employees;
(b) complaints against the 7-Eleven franchise included employees being underpaid and forced to breach their visa requirements and work very long hours without a break; and
(c) these reports and the employment practices of 7-Eleven franchisees have caused significant community concern which must be addressed; and
(2) calls on the Government to:
(a) take immediate action to address the abuse of workers across the 7-Eleven franchise network; and
(b) ensure that workers that were forced by their employers to breach their visa conditions are not penalised.
( Notice given 7 September 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mr Champion — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
4 MRS GRIGGS: To move:
That this House:
(1) commends the fantastic work that the Minister for Trade and Investment and the Government are doing to make Northern Australia's economic development a priority;
(2) notes that the Northern Australia Investment Forum, the next stepping stone in bringing Australia's broader strengths to Northern Australia, will focus on:
(a) the important initiatives highlighted in the White Paper on Developing Northern Australia to help business capitalise on the region's strengths by removing barriers to investment; and
(b) showcase investment opportunities on offer and in prospect in the north; and
(3) recognises:
(a) that Northern Australia accounts for a significant share of Australia's exports with more than half of Australia's sea exports leaving via northern ports;
(b) that the north will account for 42 per cent of the Australian economy by 2040, up from 35 per cent in 2011; and
(c) the exciting potential for increased investment, trade, infrastructure, and agriculture production in the north and the job opportunities this could create.
( Notice given 18 August 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mrs Griggs — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
5 MS MACTIERNAN: To move:
That this House:
(1) recognises the failure of the Western Australian and Australian governments to manage the Western Australian economy;
(2) notes that under the Western Australian and Australian governments in Western Australia:
(a) unemployment reached its highest rate in 13 years at 6.4 per cent, with 59,000 more Western Australians out of work since the Liberal Party formed government in Western Australia;
(b) business investment dropped 12.7 per cent over the year to June 2015;
(c) state final demand fell by 3.6 per cent in the year to June 2015;
(d) the state's credit rating was downgraded by Moody's and Standard & Poor's;
(e) business and consumer confidence are at record low levels;
(f) state net debt has blown out from $3.6 billion in 2008 when the Liberal Party formed government in Western Australia to $30 billion in 2015; and
(g) cost of living increased sharply by 54.3 per cent; and
(3) condemns the:
(a) Australian Government for:
(i) cutting $3.1 billion from Western Australian schools and $5.8 billion from hospitals over 10 years; and
(ii) removing the level playing field from Western Australia in the manufacture of offshore patrol vessels; and
(b) Western Australian and Australian governments for squandering the mining boom and failing to diversify the Western Australian economy and create a jobs and growth plan for the future.
( Notice given 8 September 2015. )
Time allotted—remaining private Members' business time prior to 12 noon.
Speech time limits—
Ms MacTiernan—5 minutes .
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
Items for Federation Chamber (11 am to 1.30 pm)
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
Notices
1 MS HALL: To move:
That this House:
(1) notes that:
(a) National Asthma Week was 1 to 7 September 2015;
(b) the theme of National Asthma Week 2015 was 'You Care We Care—One Asthma Community';
(c) asthma affects around one in four children, one in seven adolescents and one in ten adults;
(d) 2.3 million Australians currently have asthma;
(e) asthma is the number one cause of hospital admissions amongst young children; and
(f) while many in our community lead highly successful lives despite their asthma, asthma continues to be a significant burden for too many including those who live below the poverty line and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and
(2) congratulates Asthma Australia for its work promoting National Asthma Week and raising community awareness of asthma.
( Notice given 7 September 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Ms Hall — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
2 MR WOOD: To move:
That this House:
(1) notes that the:
(a) majority of Australians believe the use of animal testing to evaluate the safety of cosmetic products and ingredients is unnecessary; and
(b) regulatory framework in Australia for chemicals, including cosmetics, is complex; and
(2) moves to phase out the unnecessary developing, manufacturing, selling, advertising or importing into Australia of cosmetics, or ingredients in cosmetics, which have been tested on live animals to evaluate the safety of those products and ingredients.
( Notice given 18 August 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mr Wood — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
3 MR CLARE: To move:
That this House:
(1) notes that:
(a) nine men a day die from prostate cancer;
(b) September is Prostate Cancer Awareness Month;
(c) Members of Parliament and members of the community are encouraged to host their own Big Aussie Barbie to raise awareness for the prevention of prostate cancer in Australia; and
(d) the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (PCFA) encourages all men to:
(i) be aware of the importance of early detection;
(ii) consult with their general practitioner about prostate cancer; and
(iii) if they have a family history of prostate cancer and are aged 40 to 50 years, arrange with their general practitioner to be tested; and
(2) acknowledges the important work done by the PCFA through promoting research, raising awareness and supporting the families of prostate cancer sufferers and survivors.
( Notice given 7 September 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mr Clare — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
4 MR SIMPKINS: To move:
That this House:
(1) celebrates:
(a) 16 September as the anniversary of the 1963 Malaysian federation; and
(b) the long term friendship that exists between governments and people of Australia and Malaysia; and
(2) acknowledges:
(a) the 23 Australian servicemen who died and 8 who were wounded during the Indonesian-Malaysian confrontation and the establishment of the state of Malaysia;
(b) that our security partnership, including defence cooperation and our joint participation in the Five Power Defence Arrangements, remains a key component of our bilateral relationship; and
(c) the efforts of the Australian Government to further strengthen ties between our two countries through stronger trade links and other initiatives such as the New Colombo Plan.
( Notice given 8 September 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mr Simpkins — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
5 MS BIRD: To move:
That this House calls on the Government to:
(1) acknowledge that:
(a) the drop in apprentices currently in training from 417,700 in September 2013 to 319,700 in March 2015 will impact on the future availability of skilled workers in Australia; and
(b) apprenticeship commencements and completions are down approximately 20 per cent for the 12 months to 31 December 2014;
(2) recognise that the $1 billion in cuts to apprenticeship support, including Tools For Your Trade payments and mentoring and access programs, have had an impact on apprentice numbers;
(3) implement strategies as a matter of urgency to encourage more apprentices into training to prevent skills shortages in the future; and
(4) invest in skills and training young Australians to ensure that Australia does not have to rely heavily on Temporary Work (Skilled) visas (subclass 457) resulting from a lack of investment in skills and training.
( Notice given 8 September 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Ms Bird — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
6 MR COBB: To move:
That this House:
(1) notes that more than 27,000 Australian boys and girls participate in the Australian Defence Force Cadet program: Army, Air Force and Navy;
(2) expresses its support for the program and the role that it plays in youth development throughout Australia;
(3) encourages young Australians to consider joining their nearest cadet unit; and
(4) extends its appreciation to Australian Defence Force personnel, reservists and volunteers who assist in the delivery of the program.
( Notice given 18 August 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mr Cobb — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
7 MR HAYES: To move:
That this House:
(1) notes that:
(a) National Police Remembrance Day is observed on 29 September; and
(b) this year marks 100 years of women in policing;
(2) acknowledges the:
(a) significant role police officers across Australia make to our local communities and the great deal of risk and sacrifice that comes with their duty; and
(b) ultimate sacrifice that has been made by police officers who have been killed in the course of their duty and honours their lives;
(3) recognises the good work of Police Legacy who look after the loved ones of police officers who have died as a result of their duty; and
(4) reaffirms its support for the nation's 56,000 police officers whose dedication and commitment ensure peace and safety of our communities.
( Notice given 8 September 2015. )
Time allotted—20 minutes .
Speech time limits—
Mr Hayes — 5 minutes.
Other Members—5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
Orders of the day
1 MARRIAGE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2015 (Mr Entsch): Second reading—Resumption of debate ( from 7 September 2015 ).
Time allotted — remaining private Members ' business time prior to 1.30 pm.
Speech time limits—
All Members — 5 minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
THE HON A. D. H. SMITH MP
Speaker of the House of Representatives
9 September 2015
That:
(1) Mr Varvaris be appointed a member of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade;
(2) Ms Henderson be discharged from the Standing Committee on Health and that, in her place, Dr Gillespie be appointed a member of the committee;
(3) Ms Price be discharged from the Standing Committee on Infrastructure and Communications and that, in her place, Mr Alexander be appointed a member of the committee.
The humanitarian crisis in Syria.
Kurdish militias, backed by international anti-ISIL coalition air strikes, launched an offensive on ISIL positions in the south-east of the city, also causing the group to retreat. Its withdrawal prompted many of the estimated 120,000 people who had fled the city following the group’s advances to begin to return to their homes.
Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Primary Television Broadcasting Service) Bill 2015
This print on the Index now marks the 17th out of the last 19 months that the Index has been below 100. A level of the Index below 100 indicates that pessimists outnumber optimists. After acknowledging some volatility in the series the underlying picture is that confidence has been little changed over the last year—firmly stuck below 100 and averaging around 96.
… the Australian economy grew at 0.9 of one per cent, which is a strong figure. The momentum is there in the Australian economy. The best friend of the Australian economy is the coalition government.
Growth in exports, household spending, services and new dwellings confirms that the Government’s economic plan is working.
That Mr Hawke be discharged from the Standing Committee on Education and Employment and that, in his place, Dr Stone be appointed a member of the committee.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Standing) Bill 2015
The Committee acknowledges the more-than-adequate management systems, and effective industry proactivity, in the sustainable management and continuous improvement of the Tasmanian fin-fish aquaculture industry.
… green activism had increased the costs of developing a mine by up to 10 times.
… a development that took just over a year in 2008 would now take up to five years as companies get weighed down by litigation.
… 'disrupt and delay' key projects and infrastructure while gradually eroding public and political support for the industry …
Legal challenges can stop projects outright, or can delay them in order to buy time to build a much stronger movement and powerful public campaigns. They can also expose the impacts, increase costs, raise investor uncertainty, and create a powerful platform for public campaigning.
I may live nowhere near the Liverpool Plains or the Great Barrier Reef, but I sure as hell am concerned that they are protected.
The latest move by the Abbott Government puts at risk not just our environment but our very democracy and is quite simply unbelievable.
The move I'm talking about is an attempt to remove a section of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
So what does this change mean? Well if pushed through, only people who are directly affected by development will be allowed to challenge the approval. So what about the Great Barrier Reef? Well, unless the Great Barrier Reef happens to be in your backyard, you won't have any legal grounds to oppose irresponsible action of others.
This legislative restriction is divisive, it isolates us and it means we're not allowed to care.
… to provide for the protection of the environment, especially those aspects of the environment that are matters of national environmental significance …
(b) at any time in the 2 years immediately before the decision, failure or conduct … engaged in a series of activities in Australia or an external Territory for protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment.
(b) at any time in the 2 years immediately before the decision, failure or conduct, the organisation or association has engaged in a series of activities in Australia or an external Territory for protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment; and
(c) at the time of the decision, failure or conduct, the objects or purposes of the organisation or association included protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment.
The latest move by the Abbott government puts at risk not just our environment but our very democracy. It is quite simply unbelievable.
This legislative restriction is divisive, it isolates us. It means we are not allowed to care.
It is regrettable that a technical legal error from the Federal Environment Department has exposed the approval to an adverse decision.
… there was often a real question about whether the applicant had standing to sue; that is, whether he or she was an appropriate person to bring the case. The question always turned on whether the applicant had a personal financial or property interest in the administrative decision, the legal validity of which the court was asked to review. This test was inherited by Australian courts from 19th century English cases.
As time went on, Australian judges came to think this test too narrow. They recognised that people sometimes felt deeply about an administrative decision, including a decision regarding land use or development, even though it did not adversely affect their pockets; but the person thought the decision contrary to the public interest. Over a series of cases, judges gradually decided it was reasonable to allow such people to test the legal validity of the decision that gave rise to their concern. Consequently, they accorded standing to applicants able to demonstrate a genuine interest, not necessarily financial, in the issue or place under consideration. The significant cases commence with the High Court decision in Onus v Alcoa …
The problem about this approach was that its application was uncertain. How much concern was necessary? Judges found themselves examining the minutiae of the applicant's involvement in the problem, instead of getting on with the legal issue about the validity of the administrative decision. It was in order to end the expensive side-issue about standing, that section 487 was inserted into the EPBC Act. A clear test was laid down in that section. Henceforth the court would rarely need to spend any time on standing; it could get on with the case itself.
Section 487 has worked well. As anticipated, the section has eliminated arguments about standing, with consequential savings in cost and time. … [It] has not opened any floodgates; only about one-half of one per cent of decisions under the EPBC Act have been subjected to an application for judicial review.
The Minister apparently assumes the court will apply the standing rule laid down in section 5 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (the ADJR Act). That section allows a 'person aggrieved' to seek review of a decision. The ADJR Act does not define this term and there is no reason to read it as being limited to a person with a financial interest in the decision.
The only change from the present situation will be that the parties, and so the courts, will spend time examining the details of the applicant's association with the relevant issue or place. And people wonder why litigation is so expensive.
Farmers would incur individually the cost of both lawyers and experts to add some substance to their challenges and once you get experts involved, you cruise past $50,000 very quickly.
Unless you can prove your financial interests are directly affected then you would likely have no right to object to the decision.
Merit appeals provide a safeguard against biased decision-making by consent authorities and enhance the accountability of these authorities. The extension of third party merit appeals acts as a disincentive for corrupt decision-making by consent authorities.
An individual is taken to be a person aggrieved by the decision, failure or conduct if:
(a) the individual is an Australian citizen or ordinarily resident in Australia or an external Territory …
(b) at any time in the 2 years immediately before the decision, failure or conduct, the individual has engaged in a series of activities in Australia or an external Territory for protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment.
Our strategy is to 'disrupt and delay' key projects and infrastructure while gradually eroding public and political support for the industry …
Our strategy is to 'disrupt and delay' key projects and infrastructure while gradually eroding public and political support for the industry …
The Adani decision seems to have been caused by either Adani or the department not applying the law properly, but then, suddenly and with no warning or consultation, we get this put forward … we prefer evidence-based policy making.
Third party appeal rights have the potential to deter corrupt approaches by minimising the chance that any favouritism sought will succeed. The absence of third party appeals creates an opportunity for corrupt conduct to occur, as an important disincentive for corrupt decision-making is absent from the planning system.
Our strategy is to ‘disrupt and delay’ key projects and infrastructure while gradually eroding public and political support for the industry …
Legal challenges can stop projects outright, or can delay them in order to buy time to build a much stronger movement and powerful public campaigns. They can also expose the impacts, increase costs, raise investor uncertainty, and create a powerful platform for public campaigning.
Mount legal challenges to the approval of several key ports, mines and rail lines … that delay, limit or stop all of the major infrastructure projects … that have been identified as a high priority in the strategy …
… all grants contracted in previous financial years (2013-14 and 2014-15), including grants that do not use IAS funds, including grants through the Aboriginal Benefits Account.
The systematic rape of women and girls from the Yazidi religious minority has become deeply enmeshed in the organization and the radical theology of—
… in the year since the group announced it was reviving slavery as an institution.
The trade in Yazidi women … has created a persistent infrastructure, with a network of warehouses where the victims are held, viewing rooms where they are inspected and marketed, and a dedicated fleet of buses used to transport them.
"Prior to the taking of Sinjar, Shariah students in the Islamic State were tasked to research the Yazidis," said the English-language article, headlined "The Revival of Slavery Before the Hour," which appeared in the October issue of the magazine …
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mrs Griggs ) took the chair at 09:30.
Stick to your Scout promises always—even after you have ceased to be a boy and God help you to do it.
This is the Captain speaking. Enemy vessels have been sighted by the Ark Royal's aircraft. They are ahead on a reciprocal course to us. Surface action can be immediately expected. That is all.
In the end, dad was more than a horseman. An icon, a legend, all of that. Built from flames and hardship to go with success. Bob Hawke described him as a great and good Australian. Enough said.
In respect of the planned transfer of the oversight functions of the Private Health Insurance Administration Council (PHIAC) to the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA),
(a) how many staff members does PHIAC currently employ to manage the functions being transferred to the APRA,
(b) how many staff members will be employed to manage these functions within APRA after the transferral of responsibilities,
(c) what sum of money has been allocated to APRA to administer these new functions,
(d) what consultation has been undertaken with industry about the transferral, specifically, how many meetings have been held, and where,
(e) what concerns have been raised by industry, and how has the Government responded to these, (f) is he confident that APRA will be able to provide robust regulatory oversight of the private health insurance industry, and
(g) can he explain the regulatory arrangements that will facilitate this transfer of responsibilities
(a) and (b): How many staff members does PHIAC currently employ to manage the functions being transferred to the APRA, how many staff members will be employed to manage these functions within APRA after the transferral of responsibilities?
PHIAC employed 34 full-time equivalent staff as at 30 June 2015. APRA has advised that:
(c) What sum of money has been allocated to APRA to administer these new functions?
Consistent with other industries that APRA regulates, the regulatory activities associated with private health insurers will continue to be funded through industry levies.
(d) What consultation has been undertaken with industry about the transferral, specifically, how many meetings have been held, and where?
An exposure draft of the Private Health Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Bill 2015, with accompanying explanatory material, was released by Treasury on 12 January 2015. Submissions on the Prudential Supervision Bill were received following consultation and a number of issues raised were addressed through further drafting of the Prudential Supervision Bill.
An exposure draft of the Private Health Insurance (Prudential Supervision) (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2015, as well as the three levy Bills, were provided to the private health insurance industry on 20 March 2015. Submissions on these Bills were also received and issues raised were addressed through further drafting of the Bills.
Additionally, Treasury held industry consultation sessions with the private health insurance industry, the Department of Health and APRA on 16 January 2015, 29 January 2015 and 8 April 2015 in Canberra.
Further, APRA has consulted with the private health insurance industry on its proposals for the future prudential and reporting frameworks for that industry. APRA released a public consultation paper on 31 March 2015 and accepted submissions until 19 May 2015. During that period, APRA held face‑to‑face consultation sessions with representatives from the private health insurance industry in both Sydney and Melbourne on 24 April and again in Sydney on 11 May.
APRA has also held:
(e) what concerns have been raised by industry, and how has the Government responded to these?
A consultation summary with a list of industry concerns and Government's response is available on the Treasury website at: http://treasury.gov.au/ConsultationsandReviews/Consultations/2015/Private-Health-Insurance-Bill-2015
(f) Is he confident that APRA will be able to provide robust regulatory oversight of the private health insurance industry?
APRA and PHIAC staff have actively engaged for much of the past year to prepare for the transfer and to ensure that APRA was ready to deliver a seamless and effective transfer of responsibilities on 1 July. Further, as most of the PHIAC staff transferred to APRA, there was significant health insurance expertise within APRA from day one. This was complemented by APRA's prudential supervision capabilities currently in place for banking, insurance and superannuation.
(g) can he explain the regulatory arrangements that will facilitate this transfer of responsibilities?
An explanation of the Private Health Insurance (Prudential Supervision) (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Act 2015 which facilitates the transfer of responsibilities between PHIAC and APRA is available in the Explanatory Memorandum to the package of legislation. The Explanatory Memorandum is located on the Parliament of Australia website at: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Private_Health_2015
Could he provide a table detailing companies (formally or informally) consulted with, and the date(s) of consultation, regarding the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Better Targeting the Income Tax Transparency Laws) Bill 2015.
Exposure draft legislation was released for consultation on 4 June 2015. Submissions on the draft legislation are available at: http://www.treasury.gov.au/ConsultationsandReviews/Consultations/2015/Better-targeting-the-income-tax-transparency-laws/Submissions.
In respect of the Western Australian Government's Pilbara Energy Infrastructure Project, (a) has his department or Infrastructure Australia received advice from the Western Australian Government on this project; if so, what advice was received, and (b) has the Western Australian Government at any stage sought funding for this project.
(a) The Western Australian (WA) Government's submission to Infrastructure Australia's 2008 Audit included the project as a key priority. Infrastructure Australia has not received an Infrastructure Priority List submission from the WA Government on the Pilbara Energy Infrastructure Project. The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development has received no advice from the WA Government on this project.
(b) The WA Government has not sought funding for this project from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development or from Infrastructure Australia.
In respect of labour hire firms contracted by the Minister's department(s) in 2014-15, (a) how many positions were filled using casual staff from labour hire firms, (b) what sum was spent on the provision of these casual staff, and (c) what roles did these casual staff fulfil
a) Nil.
b) Nil.
c) Not applicable.
In respect of fees for late or delayed payment of contracted services or products by the Minister's department(s) in 2014-15, (a) which services or products do these fees relate to, and (b) what sum was spent
No fees were spent in 2014-15 by the Department in relation to late or delayed payment of contracted services or products.
In respect of the Minister's departmental office(s), has the building(s) received energy efficiency upgrades; if so, (a) when, and (b) how has this upgrade affected (i) average energy use, and (ii) average energy cost.
No.
What sum did the Minister's department spend in 2014-15 on the purchase and/or lease of (a) food and beverage equipment, and (b) exercise equipment, for staff in the (i) Minister's office, and (ii) departmental office(s)
(a) (i) Nil.
(ii) Nil.
(b) (i) Nil.
(ii) Nil.
In respect of departmental staff (a) how many redundancies were made in 2014-15, and (b) what is the total cost of payments associated with these redundancies.
In 2014-15 the Department provided 59 redundancies. Of those 59 redundancies, 53 were voluntary redundancies, 3 involuntary redundancies and 3 SES retirements from the APS.
The Department paid out $3,299,168 in severance benefits, $498,067 in lieu of notice payments and $2,591,601 in owed entitlements which included accrued long service leave and annual leave, totalling $6,379,836 in the 2014-15 financial year.
In 2014–15, what sum was spent on replacing lost, stolen or misplaced equipment of Ministerial staff, and what goods were replaced
During the 2014–2015 financial year there was no cost for replacing lost, stolen or misplaced equipment of Ministerial staff.
(1) In 2014-15, what sum was spent on (a) domestic travel, and (b) international travel, for departmental staff. (2) Of this, (a) on what dates, and to what locations, did the Minister travel, (b) how many departmental staff accompanied the Minister on this travel, and (c) for what purpose was the travel.
(1) In 2014-15 the Department spent (a) $811,453 on domestic travel and (b) $402,154 on international travel for departmental staff.
(2) Questions relating to Ministerial travel should be directed to the Department of Finance.
(1) In 2014-15, what sum was spent on (a) domestic travel, and (b) international travel, for the (i) Minister, and (ii) Minister's staff. (2) Of this, (a) on what dates, and to what locations, did the Minister travel, (b) how many Ministerial staff accompanied the Minister on this travel, and (c) for what purpose was the travel
1-2. These questions should be directed to the Department of Finance.
In 2014-15, (a) what sum was spent on training for departmental staff, (b) on what date(s), and at what location(s), did the training occur, and (c) what outcomes were achieved
In 2014-15:
(a) the total sum spent on training for Departmental staff was $855,906.68.
(b) The Department does not capture information relating to the date(s) and location of the training.
(c) Training in 2014-15 enhanced the Department's capability in areas including strategic policy, economics, analytics, people management, communication and project management.
In 2014–15, (a) what sum was spent on training for Ministerial staff, (b) on what date(s), and at what location(s), did the training occur, and (c) what outcomes were achieved
The Department did not expend any funds on training for Ministerial staff for the 2014–15 financial year.
Did the Minister host any conferences in 2014-15; if so (a) on what date(s) did each conference occur, and at what location(s), (b) what total sum was spent on each conference, and of this, what sum was spent on (i) meals and accommodation, and what are the details, (ii) travel, and what are the details, and (iii) social events, and what are the details, (iv) travel, and what are the details, and (c) what outcomes were achieved at each conference.
The Assistant Minister did not host any conferences in 2014-15.
Did the Minister host any conferences in 2014-15; if so (a) on what date(s) did each conference occur, and at what location(s), (b) what total sum was spent on each conference, and of this, what sum was spent on (i) meals and accommodation, and what are the details, (ii) travel, and what are the details, and (iii) social events, and what are the details, (iv) travel, and what are the details, and (c) what outcomes were achieved at each conference.
Nil
In respect of catering and hospitality by the Minister's department in 2014-15, (a) what total sum was spent, (b) for what functions was the catering and hospitality, (c) on what date(s) did each function occur, and at what location(s), and (d) for each function, what sum was spent on (i) meals, (ii) drinks, (iii) hospitality staff, and (iv) other costs.
Details of the Department's catering and hospitality expense from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015 is provided in the table below. The Department's financial management system does not allow for a distinction between spending on 'meals', 'drinks', 'hospitality staff', and 'other costs'.
In respect of catering and hospitality by the Minister in 2014-15, (a) what total sum was spent, (b) for what functions was the catering and hospitality, (c) on what date(s) did each function occur, and at what location(s), and (d) for each function, what sum was spent on (i) meals, (ii) drinks, (iii) hospitality staff, and (iv) other costs.
a - d).
Details of the Minister and Parliamentary Secretary Office's catering and hospitality expense from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015 is provided in the table below. The Department's financial management system does not allow for a distinction between spending on meals, drinks, hospitality staff and other costs.