The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 09:30, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Measures No. 5) Bill 2017
That this bill be now read a second time.
ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Bill 2017
That this bill be now read a second time.
Treasury Laws Amendment (Reducing Pressure on Housing Affordability Measures No. 1) Bill 2017
That this bill be now read a second time.
First Home Super Saver Tax Bill 2017
That this bill be now read a second time.
Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Tax Integrity) Bill 2017
That this bill be now read a second time.
Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment (Vacancy Fees) Bill 2017
That this bill be now read a second time.
That, in accordance with section 5 of the Parliament Act 1974, the House approve the following proposal for works in the Parliamentary Zone which were presented to the House on 4 September 2017, namely:
1.Questacon signage;
2.International Flag Display; and
3.Seating at Commonwealth Place.
Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017
… the community has a right to expect that taxpayer-funded welfare payments are not being used to fund drug and alcohol addiction and that jobseekers do all that they can reasonably do to find a job, including addressing any barriers which have prevented them from doing so.
... there is … no evidence that this drug testing proposal would improve health, social or employment outcomes for people. Indeed, the evidence is to the contrary … The drug test measure would direct very precious dollars—the overall costs of which are unknown—to a measure which has been widely condemned by leading health experts.
Addiction medicine specialists in the drug and alcohol sector more generally have not been properly consulted on these measures. We were surprised by these measures. Our analysis and advice is that the measures will be costly and ineffective and that government should consult with the sector on the development of evidence-based solutions to prevent and better address substance use disorders and increase the availability of treatment services across the nation.
Dr Alex Wodak, the President of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation, said: "Had the Turnbull government consulted experts before unveiling this plan, they would have been advised to drop these measures pronto. Drug testing trials for people on income support have been trialled and abandoned in a few countries—
"In addition to causing significant harm to affected people and the wider community, they came at an enormous cost to the taxpayer. Isn’t the government supposed to be reining in wasteful spending?"
There is no evidence that any of these measures will directly achieve outcomes associated with reductions in alcohol or other drug use or harm, and indeed have the potential to create greater levels of harm, including increased stigma, marginalisation and poverty.
This proposal does not have an evidence base and is likely to engender greater harm to the community.
In Australia there is a real lack of funding for drug treatment services—including medically supported drug treatment. The Government would have been better off making stronger investments there rather than attacking the vulnerable.
No expert in drug and alcohol addiction has supported the random drug testing of social security recipients. Trials elsewhere have failed to achieve any positive results.
It is unclear what these measures hope to achieve. They are highly unlikely to address people's addictions if they have them and will lead to more people living in poverty. The drug-testing trial will likely be expensive and achieve nothing.
They're going to find a different way to feed their addiction. We're concerned this could lead to crime spikes.
At a human level, it could be heartless. At a practical level it could be something … but it probably needs more sociological consideration of what happens to people.
It seems like one more thing that is going to make people who are poor, even poorer.
What it's doing is increasing the stigma.
… the AMA considers these measures to be mean and stigmatising. The AMA considers substance dependence to be a serious health problem—
one that is associated with high rates of disability and mortality. The AMA firmly believes that those affected should be treated in the same way as other patients with serious health conditions, including access to treatment and supports to recovery.
… … …
The AMA is concerned that the approach could inadvertently result in increased incarceration for welfare recipients with a substance dependence.
… the Budget continues to demonise people with a range of new welfare crackdown measures. No expert in drug and alcohol addiction has supported the random drug testing of social security recipients. Trials elsewhere have failed to achieve any positive results. ACOSS strongly opposes this measure.
This bill is not only going to fail, it will increase crime in the community and that should be a major concern for all Australians …
At a time when we desperately need money for frontline services, it's being spent in a way all the available evidence tells us won't work …
Doctors don't necessarily speak with a united voice—we're a very varied group of specialists and people with different backgrounds across the country, so when you do hear doctors speaking with a united voice I think people should listen.
… an expensive, unreliable and potentially harmful testing regime to find this group of people. Existing evidence shows that drug testing welfare recipients … is not an effective way of identifying those who use drugs, and that will not bring about behaviour change.
Remember that people who use drugs are somebody’s son or daughter, brother or sister, mum or dad, or boyfriend or girlfriend. Many, through no fault of their own, had a shocking childhood or terrible education and never enjoyed a decent job.
Addiction medicine specialists, GPs, nurses, and healthcare workers of all stripes will tell you that people struggling with alcohol or drug dependence almost always keep consuming their favourite poison even after they have lost everything – their health, partner, kids, job, property and their freedom (after appearing before a court). The scientific definitions of addiction regard “continuing use despite severe adverse consequences” as a central characteristic of this condition. So ripping income support away from these people is not going to help them recover.
Someone in that circumstance … it's very difficult to cover the cost of a funeral and other associated expenses. So cutting the bereavement allowance will just place those people into further hardship and make even more difficult the period of time after bereavement.
Dear Justine,
I am alarmed and shocked at the latest proposal by our Federal Government.
That is mandatory testing of drug and alcoholic persons and cutting their social benefits if they fail such tests.
… … …
If those on social benefits fail the test, their social benefits will be immediately cancelled!
Besides that, those incapacitated by sickness or an accident caused by alcohol or other drug issues will also have their support cancelled!
I find this absurd and totally inhumane.
Justine, in the 15 years I have worked with the homeless, I can cite many occasions of mothers and people coming off drugs or alcohol.
Without benefits during that very trying time, I know many would not have survived.
Besides that, it appears the government wants to force those persons who are "caught" to undertake mandatory rehabilitation.
I wonder if the government realises that there would not be enough facilities to cater for all those they establish are taking drugs.
The consequences are massive.
Increase in crime or simply left to die in the parks!
Once addicted, I know it can be a very serious problem for many.
This addiction not only affects the lower end of the social scale, but also many from all walks of life.
Let's face it, without condoning the disease, what do many homeless and marginalised have left after our government refuses to help them with housing, or adequate social funding …
Justine, I am requesting that you and as many of your colleagues please vote against this inhumane Bill.
This bill is not only going to fail, it will increase crime in the community and that should be a major concern for all Australians.
At a time when we desperately need money for frontline services, it's being spent in a way all the available evidence tells us won't work …
Doctors don't necessarily speak with a united voice—we're a very varied group of specialists and people with different backgrounds across the country, so when you do hear doctors speaking with a united voice I think people should listen.
Existing evidence shows drug testing welfare recipients is not an effective way of identifying those who use drugs and it will not bring about behaviour change. It is an expensive, unreliable and potentially harmful testing regime to find this group of people.
There is no evidence that any of these measures will directly achieve outcomes associated with reductions in alcohol or other drug use or harms, and indeed have the potential to create greater levels of harm, including increased stigma, marginalisation and poverty.
I am amazed that the government is considering withholding welfare payments from drug and alcohol dependent people without consulting with addiction medicine specialists over the policies. They have not been given the chance to share their concerns and expertise.
Further, a wealth of scientific evidence in clinical experience has proven that people suffering from severe alcohol and drug problems cannot be punished into recovery. Pushing people into poverty will only undermine their chance of recovery.
If this government genuinely wants to help people struggling with drug and alcohol problems, Parliament should redirect public funding away from harmful, extensive drug testing trials and expand referral pathways to treatment services.
It is our view that the welfare system should provide a basic safety net for people most in need and that presence of chronic and significant health conditions should not lead to punitive responses. We subsequently oppose the measure on the basis of its propensity to undermine the effectiveness of treatment strategies that an individual may be seeking or undertaking …
The proposed removal of exemptions is fundamentally stigmatising and vilifying of individuals suffering addiction; which in itself is a known barrier to seeking treatment and overcoming addiction.
… … …
Furthermore, the RACP is seriously concerned that Schedule 14 provides for the application of financial penalties in cases where income support recipients do not participate in treatment. Again, this approach places vulnerable people at increased risk of poverty, homelessness and significant social and financial disadvantage.
My husband and I know, from past experience, just how demoralising it is when you can't find a job and you have to ask for help. To add extra to the burden with drug testing is cruel and humiliating. We are thankful we are no longer in this position and feel for those that are
This is the most obscene suggestion I have heard in 80 years.
I believe this process is a pathetic strategy to blame unemployed people generally for being unemployed and as people unworthy of help and inclusion into our society. Any reforms affecting addicts should be research based and proven. These people deserve help and compassion, not poverty and desperation.
Scientific evidence and clinical experience shows that people suffering from severe alcohol and drug problems cannot be punished into recovery. One can't keep tipping people over the edge into poverty. They need every support mechanism from professionals and the community to recover.
I urge you and colleagues to oppose the Turnbull government's plan to strip income support from those with addictions using mandatory drug testing. This proposal lacks evidence and is characterised (once again) by a failure to consult with professionals with experience and expertise in this area.
Finally, surely, we have understood by now that the difficult issue of addictions requires evidence-based strategies driven by compassion—
and creative thinking. Please think carefully about this proposal from the government and strive to remove it from our country's thinking and behaviour.
Recent increases to price are severely impacting on wine and grape businesses viability and our ability to compete on a global market.
I'm not interested in being prime minister. Really, the dream job for me is to one day be education minister …
Castlemaine Health has raised its concerns about the rising cost of energy with the state government, which has been criticised … for failing to account for soaring power prices.
That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business from moving the following motion immediately—
The House:
(1) notes:
(a) this House has unanimously asked the High Court to determine if the Deputy Prime Minister was ever validly elected to Parliament;
(b) the Government refuses to release the Solicitor-General’s advice on which the entire legitimacy of this Government rests;
(c) the Government refuses to even state whether it has sought advice on the risk to a legal challenge to the Deputy Prime Minister’s ministerial decisions;
(d) significant ministerial decisions of the Deputy Prime Minister are being delayed, including decisions which would bring power prices down for Australians; and
(e) despite the current doubts over the legality of the Deputy Prime Minister’s ministerial actions, tomorrow the Prime Minister will risk the entire legitimacy of the Government by leaving the Deputy Prime Minister in charge of the nation; and
(2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to:
(a) direct his Deputy Prime Minister to immediately stand aside; and
(b) stop abusing the trust of the Australian people by being so reckless with the leadership of the nation.
That the member be no longer heard.
The House divided. [14:55]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
That the member be no longer heard.
The House divided. [14:59]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
The House divided. [15:01]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
The Government's complete failure on energy policy.
Feedback from market participants and investors is that it is more financially secure to invest in renewable resources and that they are seeking greater market and policy certainty to be able to make investments in new dispatchable generation.
The government’s complete failure on energy policy.
The only thing missing is new jobs and apprenticeships for young people.
The ANAO has put an emphasis on the geographic distribution of grant activities as a measure of equitable distribution …
Some issues arose which I was able to address but it would have been a lot easier if I had access to the user manual for the modem rather than the generic one page setup guide provided in the box with the modem.
The Gateway modem provided by Telstra is a Sagemcom Model F@st 5355.
This manual is not available on the manufacturer's website so I phoned Sagemcom—they advised me that the Gateway is sold exclusively to Telstra and I must contact Telstra for a User Manual. They gave me the Telstra 1800 number to call.
This led to a 47 minute wait for a reply. When I was finally answered by a call centre in Manila the male operator said there was no manual, then when pressed he said he would speak with the technical support people and he put me on hold.
The end result was I ended up back on the queue for another 10 minutes before being answered by yet another operator and I had to start the whole process over again. This female operator had no idea how to deal with my query and told me to search the web using Google—which I had already done before ringing Telstra. She then said I should see if the Telstra Shop could provide a manual, which I had tried in the past with no success. I asked to speak with her supervisor and was put on hold where I remained for a further 20 minutes before speaking with yet another operator and having to explain the whole story again.
After he consulted with a supervisor he asked for a mobile phone number to call me back within the hour with information.
This did not happen. A total of 1 hour 20 minutes on the phone all spent to no avail.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Vamvakinou ) took the chair at 10:00.
Communities want their charities to be advocates, to raise their voices, to represent those who do not have the capacity to influence policies.
Dear Mr Albanese,
My wife and I have lived in Rozelle for almost 20 years and we are absolutely not against development.
We understand that a 21st Century city needs a smart combination of private and public transport options …
It is beyond us to understand how any responsible government, any responsible human being in fact, in a first world country, considers it even conceivable that it is remotely acceptable to first concentrate and then spew unfiltered exhaust fumes onto its citizens.
We realise filters will cost up front and surely cost to maintain, but our point of view is this must be built into the cost of the project and delivered as part of the project. To do anything other is outright irresponsible.
I need your help.
I have recently completed construction on my dream home in Midway Point. I specifically selected Midway Point because of its pilot site for NBN's FTTP service, as well as the views, services and lifestyle.
I am a registered voter in Lyons.
First off, this is not about my frustration in not getting connected.
It is about the repeated horror of this process. In THIRTY YEARS of Public and Private Project Management and Process and Business Analysis I have never seen a process so broken.
This process should have 2 objectives:
1) connect the customer's service
2) communicate to all customers, providers and team members where the process is and the next steps. This process has so far accomplished neither.
For my specific experience, I have been trying to get my NBN connected through iiNet for the past 3 months.
Highlights:
I have reason to believe that the information about my NBN work order has not been updated to reflect the work completed on 3 August.
I am stuck in an infinite loop between iiNet and NBN's portal information. It has been impossible to find a customer service person in iiNet or NBN who can answer my questions.
Can someone please tell me why my order is not being processed, and what I have to do to get it?
I have no phone or internet service at my house currently, making me worse off than I was before.
I IMPLORE YOU as our elected officials who have enslaved us to this process to see that the process is fixed.
Over the next 18 months, many I know will undertake this process, and they are, like me VOTERS.
Thank you for your attention and support.
Julie Zimmerman, Midway Point.
The population of Western Sydney is due to rise significantly—
in the next 20 years and our major investment will ensure we meet the healthcare needs of the region.
There is a hospital building boom … across NSW …
What proportion of the $75.6 billion in health funding in 2017-18 is expected to be spent in regional, rural and remote Australia?
In 2017-18, $64.8 billion1 has been allocated to the Department of Health for administered resourcing. The proportion of funding delivered per remoteness area is not reported for all programs, but an estimate that is proportionate with the population2 would account for
$21.4 billion being directed into regional, rural and remote Australia.
It is not possible to accurately report the rural proportion of many programs. However, location-based reporting is provided against some health programs including:
In addition, some health programs are unique for regional, and/or rural, and/or remote Australia. In 2017-18, around $1 billion will be specifically targeted to these areas.
Furthermore, a number of national programs have an additional rural loading component, to provide eligibility for higher payments. These include:
1 Portfolio Budget Statements 2017-18 Health Portfolio, p25
2 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Regional Population Growth Australia 2015-16 at http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3218.0
3 Portfolio Budget Statements 2017-18 Health Portfolio, p24
What plans exist to include the pharmaceutical drug known as Orkambi, used to treat cystic fibrosis in patients aged six years and over, on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme?
The Australian Government cannot list a new medicine on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) unless the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) has made a recommendation to list. The PBAC is an independent, statutory body comprising doctors, other health professionals and consumer representatives.
Under legislation made by this Parliament, the National Health Act 1953 , when considering a medicine proposed for PBS listing, the PBAC is required to have regard to the medicine's safety, clinical effectiveness and value for money. PBAC recommendations to list medicines on the PBS are made in response to submissions from 'sponsors', usually pharmaceutical companies.
At its March 2016 and November 2016 meetings, the PBAC considered applications made by the product's sponsor, Vertex Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd, to list Orkambi for the treatment of cystic fibrosis patients aged 12 years and over who have a certain type of mutation in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene.
The PBAC did not recommend the PBS listing of Orkambi on either occasion.
The PBAC acknowledged some short term clinical benefits of Orkambi. However, based on the evidence presented by the sponsor, the PBAC considered that the clinical effects of this therapy, in terms of improvements in long-term lung function and survival, were not clear, and the price requested by the sponsor did not represent value for money for the clinical benefit offered.
At its July 2017 meeting, the PBAC reconsidered Orkambi for listing on the PBS for the treatment of cystic fibrosis in the same patient population. The outcomes of this meeting were published on the PBS website at www.pbs.gov.au on 18 August 2017.
Due to the legislative independence of the PBAC, the Australian Government cannot pre-empt or interfere with its consideration and advisory processes.