The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Scott Ryan) took the chair at 09:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
That the days of meeting of the Senate for 2018 be as follows:
Autumn sittings:
Monday, 5 February to Thursday, 8 February
Monday, 12 February to Thursday, 15 February
Autumn sittings (2):
Monday, 19 March to Thursday, 22 March
Monday, 26 March to Wednesday, 28 March
Budget sittings:
Tuesday, 8 May to Thursday, 10 May
Winter sittings:
Monday, 18 June to Thursday, 21 June
Monday, 25 June to Thursday, 28 June
Spring sittings:
Monday, 13 August to Thursday, 16 August
Monday, 20 August to Thursday, 23 August
Monday, 10 September to Thursday, 13 September
Monday, 17 September to Thursday, 20 September
Spring sittings (2):
Monday, 15 October to Thursday, 18 October
Spring sittings (3):
Monday, 12 November to Thursday, 15 November
Monday, 26 November to Thursday, 29 November
Monday, 3 December to Thursday, 6 December.
(2A) That cross portfolio estimates hearings on Murray-Darling Basin Plan matters be scheduled for Friday, 2 March, Friday, 25 May and Friday, 26 October 2018, but not restricted to those days.
(1) That estimates hearings by legislation committees for 2018 be scheduled as follows:
2017-18 additional estimates:
Monday, 26 February and Tuesday, 27 February ( Group A )
Wednesday, 28 February and Thursday, 1 March ( Group B ).
2018-19 Budget estimates:
Monday, 21 May to Thursday, 24 May, and, if required, Friday, 25 May ( Group A )
Tuesday, 29 May to Friday, 1 June ( Group B )
Monday, 22 October and Tuesday, 23 October ( supplementary hearings—Group A )
Wednesday, 24 October and Thursday, 25 October ( supplementary hearings—Group B ).
(2) That pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 August 2008, cross portfolio estimates hearings on Indigenous matters be scheduled for Friday, 2 March, Friday, 25 May and Friday, 26 October, but not restricted to these days.
(2A) That cross portfolio estimates hearings on Murray‑Darling Basin Plan matters be scheduled for Friday, 2 March, Friday, 25 May and Friday, 26 October 2018, but not restricted to those days.
(3) That the committees consider the proposed expenditure in accordance with the allocation of departments and agencies to committees agreed to by the Senate.
(4) That committees meet in the following groups:
Group A:
Environment and Communications
Finance and Public Administration
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
Group B:
Community Affairs
Economics
Education and Employment
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade.
(5) That the committees report to the Senate on the following dates:
(a) Tuesday, 27 March 2018 in respect of the 2017-18 additional estimates; and
(b) Tuesday, 26 June 2018 in respect of the 2018-19 Budget estimates .
Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Tax Integrity) Bill 2017
Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment (Vacancy Fees) Bill 2017
That these bills be now read a third time.
Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2017
… we believe a significant factor contributing to the problem lies in the legislative framework on which support to veterans is based.
… … …
It is abundantly clear from social media groups that veterans from the more recent conflicts feel alienated and see the system as biased against them.
To allow one member to decide on the prospect of success of an Appeal is likely to reduce the belief of veterans that they have access to justice in the way they do now.
Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho'
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
While the committee acknowledges submitters' concerns regarding Schedules 1 and 5 of the bill, it has been reassured by evidence received from the Principal Member of the Veterans' Review Board, and from officers of the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation and the Department of Veterans' Affairs in response to those concerns.
In carrying out its functions, the Board must pursue the objective of providing a mechanism of review that:
(a) is accessible; and
(b) is fair, just, economical, informal and quick; and
(c) is proportionate to the importance and complexity of the matter; and
(d) promotes public trust and confidence in the decision-making of the Board.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Superannuation Laws Amendment (Strengthening Trustee Arrangements) Bill 2017
… lift superannuation funds to at least the same standard as other financial services organisations like banks and life insurance companies.
… require trustees to assess on an annual basis whether the outcomes that are being delivered by MySuper products are promoting the financial interests of MySuper members; allow the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) to refuse, or cancel, an authority to offer a MySuper product if it has a reason to believe the registrable superannuation entity (RSE) licensee may fail to comply with its obligations; impose civil and criminal penalties on directors of RSE licensees who fail to execute their responsibilities to act in the best interests of members,
… … …
… enable APRA to refuse authority for a change in ownership or control where it has concerns about the person seeking ownership or control, give a direction to a person to relinquish control of a RSE licensee and remove or suspend an RSE licensee where it is subject to the control of its owner; align APRA’s directions powers in relation to the superannuation industry with its broader directions powers in the banking and insurance industries;
… … …
… require superannuation funds to disclose on a semi-annual basis investments that they hold directly or through associated entities and initial investments into non-associated entities; …
… require RSE licensees to hold annual members’ meetings; …
… provide APRA with the ability to obtain information on expenses incurred by RSE and RSE licensees in managing or operating the RSE; …
When a governing body sits to serve the interests of the people it's meant to serve, it shouldn't be constrained by peripheral interests. That's why, in my view, independence is very important—independence from the executive and independence from peripheral interests.
I don't draw a great distinction between the structures of corporate governance; I'm more concerned about the reality of it … Where you've got proprietors or sponsors that are heavily involved in the board and are appointed as representatives of proprietors or sponsors, there's a tendency for the skills metrics to be less relevant. That's where independent directors then become much more relevant and where the skills metrics and the qualities that they can provide become far more relevant.
… different interests can take over; that is, interests of employee representatives who have other issues to pursue or interests of employers who want to bargain the super fund in with their other commercial deals with whoever they are dealing with. Either way, it is better off. And we are aware that employers, for example, might do a better deal with a bank if they throw in the superannuation, in the interests of the company. At the same time, we could not understand why the advertising of industry funds was the way it was; the advertising and the cost of that advertising didn't seem—
What she is looking for is votes out of it but she is going to lose the votes from the people who pay tax.
She is trolling for votes from the unemployed.
But I wouldn't expect anything different from her … she is a political dud.
She is a very disappointing member.
Read my lips and they will tell you
Enough is enough is enough.
Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.
Ministers and Assistant Ministers are entrusted with the conduct of public business and must act in a manner that is consistent with the highest standards of integrity and propriety.
They are required to act in accordance with the law, their oath of office and their obligations to the Parliament.
In addition to those requirements, it is vital that Ministers and Assistant Ministers conduct themselves in a manner that will ensure public confidence in them and in the government.
The Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) is the representative body of the general insurance industry in Australia. Its members represent more than 90 per cent of total premium income written by private sector general insurers. Insurance Council members, both insurers and reinsurers, are a significant part of the Australian financial services system.
Responsibility for the actions of ministerial staff rests always with their minister, and the Committee reaffirms this principle.
If it is not clear whether the employee has acted reasonably and responsibly, it may be appropriate to defer a decision on assistance until the conclusion of the proceedings…
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Employment (Senator Cash) to a question without notice asked by Senator Moore today relating to the release by Pauline Hanson’s One Nation (Queensland) of a domestic violence policy.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Attorney‑General (Senator Brandis) to a question without notice asked by Senator Rice today relating to parliamentary consideration of marriage equality legislation.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator McKenzie for today, on account of parliamentary business.
That consideration of the business before the Senate on the following days, be interrupted at approximately 5 pm, but not so as to interrupt a senator speaking, to enable senators to make their first speeches without any question before the chair, as follows:
(a) Tuesday, 5 December 2017—Senator Bartlett; and
(b) Wednesday, 29 November 2017—Senator Steele-John.
Judiciary Amendment (Commonwealth Model Litigant Obligations) Bill 2017
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to provide for enforcement of Commonwealth model litigant obligations, and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
I introduce the Judiciary Amendment (Commonwealth Model Litigant Obligations) Bill 2017.
The purpose of the bill is to subject Commonwealth litigants to enforceable model litigant obligations.
The Attorney-General already has discretion to issue obligations for Commonwealth litigants to act as a model litigant.
He exercised this discretion most recently in March 2017, requiring the Commonwealth to assess and deal with claims promptly, to pay legitimate claims, to consider alternative dispute resolution, to keep the costs of litigation to a minimum, for example by not requiring the other party to prove a matter the Commonwealth knows to be true, to not take advantage of a claimant lacking resources to litigate a legitimate claim, and to apologise when the Commonwealth has acted wrongfully.
In its Access to Justice Arrangements report of 2014, the Productivity Commission recommended that each government should impose enforceable model litigant obligations on its agencies, given government's power, resources, 'frequent-player status' and role of acting in the public interest. The Commission noted that this would not prevent governments from acting firmly to protect their interests.
In 2016 the Commonwealth Government dismissed this recommendation based on fears of increased costs and delays.
However, model litigant obligations include obligations to reduce costs and delays, and making these obligations enforceable is likely to translate this theory of reduced costs and delays into reality.
My bill would compel future Attorneys-General to maintain the practice of issuing binding obligations to act as a model litigant, and would make these obligations enforceable.
Firstly, the bill establishes a process by which the Commonwealth Ombudsman can investigate a complaint about a Commonwealth litigant failing to act in accordance with its obligations as a model litigant.
Secondly, the bill empowers a court to order a stay of proceedings while the Ombudsman considers a complaint. Thirdly, the bill provides that, if the court is satisfied that the Commonwealth litigant has contravened or is likely to contravene the model litigant obligations, the court may make any order it considers appropriate.
For example, the court could make an order with regards to the Commonwealth litigant's future conduct, or it could issue a costs order against the Commonwealth litigant in response to a past failure to act as a model litigant.
This bill demonstrates that the Productivity Commission's recommendation can be enacted responsibly. It shows that the Commonwealth Government's theoretical fears about increased costs and delays are misplaced, and that an opportunity for reduced costs and delays beckons.
This bill is modest, sensible and practical, and I commend it to the Senate.
That the Senate recognises that:
(a) today marks the 80th anniversary of the opening of the former Repatriation Commission Outpatient Clinic at 310 St Kilda Rd, Southbank, Victoria;
(b) during its operation, more than 1,000 veterans visited the Repatriation Clinic every week;
(c) the Repatriation Clinic played a key role in returning veterans to civilian life; and
(d) there is an ongoing need to provide support to veterans, including through the Arts; as Weary Dunlop who worked with returned soldiers in that building once said: "give the troops access to the Arts so that they may have an interest in life".
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) prior to providing funding through the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, the Federal Government must agree to Master Facility Agreements with the Governments of Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory,
(ii) the Minister for Resources and Northern Australia (Senator Canavan) indicated, in response to an estimates question on 1 June 2017, that he intended to release the Master Facility Agreements once they had all been signed, and
(iii) the final Master Facility Agreement was signed by the Federal Government and the Western Australian State Government on 3 November 2017; and
(b) orders that there be laid on the table by the Minister for Resources and Northern Australia, by no later than 12.45 pm on 16 November 2017, copies of the Master Facility Agreements agreed between the Federal Government and the Governments of Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) genocide is a crime under both international and Australian law,
(ii) the use of sexual violence and other acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group constitutes genocide,
(iii) the use of sexual violence in armed conflict is a war crime,
(iv) the use of sexual violence, as part of a widespread or systematic attack, directed against any civilian population is a crime against humanity, and
(v) international sex trafficking is a crime under Australian law;
(b) acknowledges that members of Da'esh:
(i) have perpetrated genocide against the Yazidi people,
(ii) are perpetrating war crimes and crimes against humanity against Muslims, Christians, Yazidis and other religious and ethnic minorities,
(iii) have perpetrated acts of sexual violence amounting to war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Iraq and Syria, and
(iv) have dedicated infrastructure for the kidnap, trafficking and sale of sex slaves in Iraq and Syria; and
(c) calls on the Government to:
(i) condemn the genocide perpetrated against the Yazidi people by Da'esh,
(ii) investigate Australians who have allegedly perpetrated war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, including through the use of sexual violence, and prosecute them as appropriate, and
(iii) support international efforts to gather evidence, investigate and prosecute those responsible for international crimes perpetrated by Da'esh in Iraq and Syria.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) this week is Perinatal Depression and Anxiety Awareness Week,
(ii) 1 in 5 expecting or new mums and 1 in 10 expecting or new dads will experience perinatal anxiety or depression,
(iii) around 100 000 families are affected by perinatal anxiety and depression every year in Australia, and
(iv) too many expecting and new parents who need help do not seek help as they are unaware of the symptoms, or of where to go to seek assistance;
(b) urges all those who need help to contact their GP or the Perinatal Anxiety and Depression Australia's (PANDA's) specialist perinatal counselling national helpline on 1300 726 306; and
(c) acknowledges the work being undertaken by PANDA to connect those who seek help, and raise awareness around perinatal depression and anxiety, including first establishing this Awareness Week in 2005.
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the ultimate sacrifice made by Australian men and women in armed conflicts overseas defending the freedom of foreign nations, and
(ii) the strong emotional and spiritual ties some Australians have to places overseas where the remains of their relatives and forebears lie, either undetected or irretrievable, ie, war grave sites; and
(b) calls upon the Australian Government, whenever it receives notice that a development on an overseas war grave site may occur, to move immediately upon receiving that notice, and use its best endeavours, to communicate Australia's view on the respect we wish to be given regarding our war grave sites.
That the time for the presentation of the report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services on its inquiry into the life insurance industry be extended to report by 31 March 2018.
Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Executive Remuneration) Bill 2017
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
This bill establishes caps and reporting requirements for the remuneration of executives in the Commonwealth public service. The Greens believe for the broader issue of excessive executive remuneration to be tackled, and for the pay gap between the rich and the poor to be bridged, this is a good first place to start. Because the government has a role to play in setting public service salaries, Parliament can play a leadership role in tackling growing wage inequality, and set public service executive salaries to better conform to community expectations and standards. There is power and purpose in this symbolism.
Ordinary Australians are coming to realise that the economic reforms of the last thirty-odd years haven't delivered all the benefits that were promised to them. People are beginning to realise that our political and economic system has failed them, and that it favours the wealthy and powerful. The strong sense of this is fuelling discontent with politics and a decline in respect for institutions globally. This growing tide of anti-establishment sentiment will only serve to increase political volatility and introduces its own set of challenges for parliaments.
Globally and in Australia, workers have increased their output, but wages have not kept up with productivity. Companies are making more money, but workers are getting a smaller share of the pie. Ordinary Australians are being asked to accept less security and be more 'flexible', but a casualised workforce is far from relaxing.
There is no more conspicuous example of income inequality that the growing disparity between what executives—our bosses—are paid and what ordinary workers are paid. The spectacle of executives taking home fat pay-packets while wages are growing at the slowest rate on record is emblematic of a system gone wrong. This does not need to be so and should not be so.
There is little evidence that, beyond a certain point, increased remuneration provides an incentive for executives to perform better. Senior executives are rarely as uniquely skilled or as valuable as excessive salaries would suggest.
There is also little evidence that excessive executive salaries make for better workplaces. Conversely, a large pay gap between executives and workers can have a negative impact on employee satisfaction and self-worth.
However, there is evidence to suggest that excessive executive salaries have become self-reinforcing phenomena. Excessive salaries can encourage people motivated by big money to manoeuvre themselves into these positions. In doing so they risk the creation of a rarefied club; and encouraging an organisational culture that emphasises the importance of money rather than the importance of the job: public service. Ultimately, this offers up the self-serving justification: it's the market rate, it must be right.
Well it isn't right, and we should call this out. More broadly, wage inequality is becoming a drag on economic performance and social cohesion. To the extent that executive pay contributes to pay inequity—and is emblematic of it—it should be of concern to anyone interested in a fairer and more prosperous society.
The Commonwealth public service has not been immune from the trend towards excessive executive salaries. Since 2010, the salaries the Senior Executive Service has risen 18%, and that of Commonwealth Departmental Secretaries even more. Over the same period, the salaries of lower ranking public servants have risen just 13%.
This is not acceptable. The current system is clearly failing to reward employees equally. It's time for the Parliament to take additional steps to restore some balance. It's time to make sure everyone in the public service gets a fairer go.
The Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (the Act) sets standards for Commonwealth entities and Commonwealth companies. Within the framework provided by the act, this bill inserts requirements relating to the remuneration of executives.
This bill will establish a cap on the total remuneration of senior executives, inclusive of any performance payments or other bonuses, at five times the average earnings of full-time adults across the Australian public service. The introduction of this cap will close the gap between the wages of public sector executives and those of ordinary Australians. Thereafter, this cap will ensure that public sector executives do not get a pay rise greater than that of average workers.
The effect of this will be to reduce the maximum salary of executives in the public service to an amount, on current figures, in the order of $420,000. This is still a lot of money, and much more than most people earn. However, it would be a significant reduction in salary for the most highly paid public servants, and would cut the wages of some by as much as half.
In time, the introduction of this pay cap is also likely to lead to a reduction, in real terms, of the wages of second tier management. Remuneration in the public service is structured around a hierarchy of pay grades. So as to maintain a premium for the chiefs, second tier management will likely see their wages stagnate for a period while a new hierarchy is established within the cap.
Finally, the introduction of this cap will help break up the 'normalisation' of the club. It will directly challenge the idea that excessive executive pay is inevitable and, in doing so, will set an example for the private sector.
This bill also introduces annual public reporting requirements. Commonwealth departments and companies covered by the act will be required to report annually on the total remuneration of executives, the ratio of total remuneration to the average wage, and the ratio of total remuneration to the minimum wage.
Introducing ongoing transparency and comparisons for executive pay in the public service will ensure that there is a constant reminder of the level of disparity that exists within the wage structure.
If the parliament is to speak with any authority on inequality, then it must lead by example and structure remuneration in the Commonwealth public service in a way that is fair and reasonable. Sky-high executive salaries are an affront on the dignity of ordinary workers, and are deeply unpopular with most Australians. Dramatic pay inequity inherently devalues the efforts of lower-ranking employees. For the sake of respect we need to take steps to put limits on executive pay.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that the New South Wales (NSW) Government will be cutting funding for disability advocacy from July 2018 and that this will affect the Council for Intellectual Disability and other disability organisations;
(b) acknowledges:
(i) the importance of advocacy for the inclusion of people with disability and their full participation in our communities,
(ii) the 'Don't Silence Us' campaign being run by the Council for Intellectual Disability calling on the Premier of NSW to guarantee on-going funding for the Council for Intellectual Disability, and
(iii) the 'Stand by Me' campaign being run by the NSW Disability Advocacy Alliance calling on the NSW Government to stand by them and provide the necessary funding for them to be able to continue serving people with disability in NSW after July next year; and
(c) calls on the Federal Government to work with the NSW Government and other state governments to ensure that funding for disability advocacy is not reduced at the state level.
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the numerous cases regarding the eligibility of senators under section 44 of the Constitution,
(ii) the uncertainty about votes that have occurred with the participation of ineligible senators, and
(iii) the motion that passed the Senate on 13 November 2017, requiring senators to disclose certain matters pertaining to their citizenship, which remains binding whether or not the Senate continues sitting; and
(b) calls upon the Prime Minister, if a similar motion passes in the House of Representatives on 27 November 2017, to immediately thereafter prorogue the Parliament until such time as the High Court has ruled on the eligibility of members and senators.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) sustainable food and fibre production on the Liverpool Plains requires an integrated and strategic approach to water reform,
(ii) the Liverpool Plains contains some of the most productive and fertile soil in Australia and farmers need certainty about water resources to assist their farming practices, and
(iii) the high degree of connectivity between groundwater systems throughout the Namoi Valley indicates that mining impacts on Liverpool Plains groundwater can extend well beyond one local site into surrounding agricultural systems; and
(b) calls on the Government to protect agricultural groundwater systems by placing a moratorium on Commonwealth approval of proposed coal and coal seam gas mining projects on the Liverpool Plains, Namoi Valley and Gunnedah Basin.
The Senate divided. [15:59]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) Australia's offshore processing regime is a deliberately cruel policy that has created humanitarian crises on Manus Island and Nauru,
(ii) there remain hundreds of men on Manus Island in the care of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Mr Dutton) who are suffering greatly because of his decision to cut off their access to drinking water, food, electricity and medication,
(iii) threats by the Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary to use force against detainees at the Manus Island detention centre are unprecedented and potentially highly dangerous, and
(iv) the men on Manus Island and the men, women and children on Nauru are Australia's responsibility and remain so; and
(b) calls on the Government to end offshore detention, and bring to Australia every person who sought asylum in Australia and who is currently in Papua New Guinea and Nauru.
That—
(a) the Senate notes:
(i) the claims by academic Mr Clive Hamilton, author of the unpublished book, Silent Invasion, that he is experiencing difficulty proceeding with publishing his book critical of foreign influence in our institutions, including this Parliament, and
(ii) in particular, his publisher's concern about being subject to significant court action financed by or at the behest of a foreign nation; and
(b) in the interests of free speech and Australian sovereignty, the Senate calls upon the Government to render such assistance to Mr Hamilton as to enable his claims to be considered or published.
Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017
That—
(1) The following bill be introduced immediately: A Bill for an Act to amend the law relating to the definition of marriage and protect religious freedoms, and for related purposes. [Short title: Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017].
(2) On Thursday, 16 November 2017, the second reading debate on the bill shall have precedence over all general business until not later than 6 pm.
(3) In the week commencing 27 November 2017, the bill shall have precedence over all government and general business and, until proceedings on the bill are concluded, the hours of meeting and routine of business shall be varied as follows:
(a) proposals under standing order 75 not be proceeded with;
(b) on Tuesday, 28 November 2017:
(i) the hours of meeting shall be 12.30 pm to 11 pm,
(ii) the routine of business from not later than 7.20 pm shall be consideration of the bill only, and
(iii) the Senate shall adjourn without debate at 11 pm; and
(c) on Thursday, 30 November 2017:
(i) the hours of meeting shall be 9.30 am to adjournment,
(ii) the routine of business from not later than 4.30 pm shall be consideration of the bill only,
(iii) divisions may take place after 4.30 pm, and
(iv) the Senate shall adjourn without debate after proceedings on the bill are concluded.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
This bill amends the Marriage Act 1961 to remove the restrictions that limit marriage in Australia to the union of a man and a woman. The bill will allow two people to marry in Australia, regardless of their sex or gender.
The bill will also recognise foreign same-sex marriages in Australia.
The requirements for a legally valid marriage otherwise remain the same under the Marriage Act.
It will continue to be the case that a marriage is void if one or both parties are already legally married, the parties are in a 'prohibited relationship' (siblings, a parent-child relationship), one or both parties did not provide real consent, or one or both parties are not of marriageable age.
The architecture of the bill has been informed following the report of the Senate Select Committee on the Exposure Draft of the Marriage Amendment (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill.
This bill further refines and improves the exposure draft legislation to more accurately reflect community attitudes expressed through the senate committee process.
The Senate select committee report identified a broad desire and willingness from parties (including pro-same-sex marriage groups) to protect religious freedom in respect to marriage in any future same-sex marriage legislation.
The Senate report identified considerable consensus for a continuation of exemptions for ministers of religion and to create a new category of religious marriage celebrants. There was also consensus agreement that any laws or exemptions need not single out same-sex couples. The Senate committee also proposed a pathway for current civil celebrants to become religious marriage celebrants, while all remaining and future civil celebrants would continue to provide non-discriminatory services.
The Senate report did not recommend introducing controversial new provisions which lack precedent within Australia's legal framework (conscientious belief, a 'no detriment' clause, exemptions for individuals). In keeping with the consensus reached by the Senate select committee, this bill does not include these provisions.
Australia's marriage laws have been amended on 20 occasions since the introduction of the Marriage Act.
These latest proposed amendments will insert an 'objects clause' which will create a legal framework to:
(a) allow civil celebrants to solemnise marriage, understood as the union of two people to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life;
(b) allow ministers of religion to solemnise marriage, respecting the doctrines, tenets and beliefs of their religion, the views of their religious community or their own religious beliefs; and
(c) allow equal access to marriage while protecting religious freedom in relation to marriage.
The bill will allow a minister of religion to refuse to solemnise a marriage if that refusal conforms to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the minister's religion.
This would allow ministers of religion to refuse to solemnise a same-sex marriage where the minister's religion only allows heterosexual couples to marry.
The bill will create a new category of religious marriage celebrants.
This new category will include:
(a) existing civil marriage celebrants wanting to perform marriages consistent with their religious beliefs; and
(b) ministers of religion that perform marriages for religious denominations that are not recognised, such as independent religious organisations and smaller, emerging religious groups.
This new category of religious marriage celebrant will be able to refuse to solemnise a marriage on grounds that the religious marriage celebrant's religious beliefs do not allow them to solemnise the marriage.
The bill will require marriage celebrants who are not religious marriage celebrants – colloquially referred to as civil celebrants – to perform same-sex marriages and will be subject to existing anti-discrimination laws.
The bill will also establish a new category of marriage officer to solemnise marriages of members of the Australian Defence Force overseas, as proposed in the Senate report.
The bill will allow bodies established for religious purpose to be able to refuse to make a facility available or provide goods and services, for the purposes of, or reasonably incidental, to the solemnisation of a marriage.
Consistent with existing anti-discrimination law, the refusal must conform to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the religion of that body or be necessary to avoid injury to the susceptibilities of adherents to that religion.
It is worth noting that bodies established for religious purposes already have a similar exemption under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984. Inclusion of this in the bill will reaffirm their exemption in relation to the solemnisation of marriage.
The bill will ensure the Sex Discrimination Act is amended to give full effect to the religious protections in the bill.
It should be noted the parliament has previously determined the ability of religious organisations to lawfully discriminate in the provision of goods and services (including hiring of facilities for weddings or marriage related services such as catering) where this discrimination would accord with the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of their religious order or would be necessary to avoid injury to the susceptibilities of adherents to their religion.
The amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act that enshrined this position were passed by the former Labor Government with support from the Coalition Opposition.
The bill follows the Senate report in not including provisions which are inconsistent with existing anti-discrimination law, create a dangerous precedent or raise complex legal matters about the intersection of federal, state and territory law.
Australian discrimination law already sets the standard and balances competing rights. These laws have operated without significant controversy for a number of years.
Finally, this bill gives effect to the view that all Australians should have equal access to Australia's marriage laws and that extending marriage to same-sex couples will strengthen and not diminish marriage in Australia.
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The complete failure of the Turnbull Government to develop a climate and energy policy, resulting in Australia's emissions increasing since 2013 and contributing to an increase in global carbon pollution in 2017.
It is the most practicable, workable thing we've seen in business for quite some time.
It turns the game around—where now, the effective functioning of homes, businesses, schools and hospitals is the priority.
The complete failure of the Turnbull Government to develop a climate and energy policy, resulting in Australia's emissions increasing since 2013 and contributing to an increase in global carbon pollution in 2017.
To prevent widespread misery and catastrophic biodiversity loss, humanity must practice a more environmentally sustainable alternative to business as usual.
That the Senate take note of the report.
Australian Government response to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee final report:
Inquiry into the growing evidence of an emerging tick-borne disease that causes a Lyme-like illness for many Australian patients
November 2017
Introduction
The Australian Government has taken an interest in, and is concerned for, Australian patients who are sharing their stories about suffering with debilitating symptom complexes attributed to ticks. The Australian Government Department of Health began engaging with patients and advocacy groups in early 2013 to discuss the concerns about Lyme borreliosis, also known as Lyme disease. Professor Chris Baggoley AO, established a short-term advisory committee (Chief Medical Officer's Advisory Committee on Lyme Disease in March 2013 [CACLD]) to consider the evidence for a Borrelia species causing illness in Australians, looking at diagnostic algorithms for borreliosis in Australians and treatments for borreliosis, awareness-raising and education, plus research into borreliosis.
Through regular communication and correspondence, the Government has gained a deeper appreciation and real concern for those Australians experiencing these chronic debilitating symptoms. The Government remains engaged with the patient and medical community to continue to find, share and understand the evidence associated with this medical conundrum. The Government hopes its work with the clinical medicine and research communities will result in answers and relief for patients and their families.
The inquiry into Growing evidence of an emerging tick-borne disease that causes a Lyme-like illness for many Australian patients conducted by the Senate Community Affairs References Committee culminated in the Committee's final report (the Report) building on the interim report tabled in May 2016. The Government thanks the Committee and the various stakeholders for their valuable and thoughtful input to the Inquiry.
This response addresses the specific recommendations raised in the Senate Committee's Report, and has been coordinated and prepared by the Department of Health. A general over-riding concern of the Government, expressed in these responses, is that, at this time, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that these debilitating symptom complexes are in large part 'tick-borne'. Many of the recommendations pre-suppose a tick-borne ætiology, the acceptance of which may not be in the best interests of achieving appropriate diagnosis and treatment for the suffering of these patients.
The Australian Government through the Department of Health remains open-minded about the cause of the various complexes which manifest as constellations of chronic debilitating symptoms. The best outcome for patients is to not draw conclusions based on poor levels of evidence, but to consider each patient thoroughly in a multidisciplinary medical approach that makes the best use of clinical acumen and available diagnostic skills and technology.
Recommendations and Australian Government responses
Recommendation 1
The committee recommends that the Australian Government Department of Health engage with stakeholders following the publication of the National Serology Reference Laboratory review to discuss the findings of the review and any bearing those may have on testing for Lyme disease in Australia.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health, agrees to share the findings of the report and engage with stakeholders at an appropriate time.
Recommendation 2
The committee recommends that the Australian Government increase funding for research into tick-borne pathogens as a matter of urgency. This funding should include:
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health recognises the need to direct funding to determine the cause or causes of the symptoms affecting these patients through research that is comprehensive, evidence-based and incorporates a multidisciplinary assessment.
The department notes the current investigation of potential tick-borne infectious pathogens and the current lack of evidence that the illnesses in question are in large part tick-derived or of an infectious nature. However, the department agrees that research into the microbiome of ticks in Australia is important, given the evidence that ticks can transmit infectious diseases here and in other countries. Evaluation of the potential of identified organisms to cause infections is an important research goal, but will not necessarily lead to the therapeutic answers required by this patient population. It is premature to fund the development of new diagnostic tests unless and until causative agents are identified.
The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) is the government's lead agency for funding health and medical research. NHMRC accepts, through its various funding schemes, investigator-initiated research proposals in any area relevant to human health. This may include research proposals aimed at debilitating symptom complexes attributed to ticks.
In addition, research into debilitating symptom complexes attributed to ticks will be funded through an NHMRC Targeted Call for Research (TCR). TCRs are one of the mechanisms through which NHMRC directs priority funding to defined areas of need.
The Minister for Health has announced that the NHMRC will hold a TCR on this topic in 2017–2018. As a first step, NHMRC has established a committee of independent scientific experts and consumer representatives to help frame the research question for the TCR. The committee information can be found on the NHMRC website1.
Funding of $3 million will be available for this research and will be a significant response to the concerns of patients who are seeking answers to their medical condition.
It is premature to fund the development of new diagnostic tests unless and until causative agents are identified.
Recommendation 3
The committee recommends that government medical authorities, in consultation with stakeholders including the Australian Chronic Infectious and Inflammatory Diseases Society (ACIIDS) and the Karl McManus Foundation, establish a clinical trial of treatment guidelines developed by ACIIDS with the aim of determining a safe treatment protocol for patients with tick-borne illness.
The department has a working relationship with the Karl McManus Foundation and the Australian Chronic Infectious and Inflammatory Diseases Society and officials have met with representatives of both organisations since the tabling of the final report. Should evidence emerge to define the underlying cause of these debilitating symptom complexes, the department would be happy to engage in discussions about potential treatment trials.
We are cognisant of the evidence of Professor Lindsay Grayson to the Committee, suggesting multiple underlying causes for these symptom complexes. If the government's calls for research into the underlying cause of the symptoms does indicate multiple causes, treatment and treatment trials will need to be tailored to the appropriate diagnoses. Such research may include investigation of the merit of multidisciplinary medical teams in the assessment, diagnosis and treatment of patients.
Recommendation 4
The committee recommends that the Australian Government allocate funding for research into medically-appropriate treatment of tick-borne disease, and that medical authorities measure the value of treatment in terms of patient recovery and return to health. The best treatment options must then be developed into clinical treatment guidelines.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health recognises the need to direct funding to determine the cause or causes of the symptoms affecting these patients through research that is comprehensive, evidence-based and incorporates a multidisciplinary assessment. Such research may reveal a component of tick-borne disease and contribute to appropriate treatments and the development of treatment guidelines.
Ethically designed clinical trials may be possible in the future when the causes of these debilitating symptom complexes are better understood.
Recommendation 5
The committee recommends that the Australian Government Department of Health facilitate, as a matter of urgency, a summit to develop a cooperative framework which can accommodate patient and medical needs with the objective of establishing a multidisciplinary approach to addressing tick-borne illness across all jurisdictions.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health, partially supports this recommendation, and will arrange a forum with the proviso that stakeholders do not meet under the premise that the diseases in question are proven to be tick-borne. The Minister for Health and Minister for Sport, the Hon Greg Hunt MP, will convene and attend the forum. State and territory health authorities, the Australian Medical Association, representatives from the relevant medical colleges, along with patient groups, will be invited and encouraged to participate in the forum. All parties attending the forum will contribute to the development of a framework for patient-centred multidisciplinary care teams.
For the best care, including improving access to care, we believe that these patients need a coordinated multidisciplinary assessment and management approach. The department has already engaged with the learned medical colleges to facilitate this, noting the Commonwealth does not provide direct clinical services. States and territories, through specialist medical practitioners in their public hospitals, are best placed to play a leading role in establishing a multidisciplinary approach to care. Such an approach will also require each patient's general practitioner to be involved, in addition to general and subspecialty physicians, pathologists, psychiatrists and allied health professionals. In 2017, the department will approach state and territory government health authorities to propose a patient-focussed plan to pilot a multidisciplinary assessment and management clinic designed to answer research questions in multiple jurisdictions. The pilot program will then guide progress.
Recommendation 6
The committee recommends that federal, state and territory health agencies, through the Council of Australian Governments Health Council, develop a consistent, national approach to addressing tick-borne illness.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health would support consideration of a national approach via the Council of Australian Governments' Health Council (CHC) and the Australian Health Ministers' Advisory Council (AHMAC) to the comprehensive multidisciplinary management of these debilitating symptom complexes. The Government, however, emphasises the need for an open mind on causality, so a national approach would not presuppose a tick-borne ætiology.
Recommendation 7
The committee recommends that the Australian Government Department of Health urgently undertake an epidemiological assessment of the prevalence of suspected tick-borne illness in Australia, the process and findings of which are to be made publicly available.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health recognises the need to determine the cause or causes of the symptoms affecting these patients through research that is comprehensive, evidence-based and incorporates a multidisciplinary assessment. Should such research reveal an identifiable tick-borne disease that matches a symptom complex, the feasibility of an epidemiological study will be examined.
At this time, it is not possible to undertake such an epidemiological study without the evidence of, or ability to accurately diagnose, uncharacterised tick-borne illnesses (other than identified illnesses in Australia such as Australian Rickettsial infections and mammalian meat allergy).
Recommendation 8
The committee recommends that the Australian Government Department of Health establish the prevalence and geographical distribution of overseas-acquired Lyme disease in Australia.
Collecting epidemiological data on overseas acquired Lyme disease would be best achieved if overseas-acquired Lyme disease was nationally notifiable. Lyme disease has previously been considered by national public health experts twice for inclusion in the Australian National Notifiable Diseases List, however, on both occasions, the criteria for inclusion were not met.
As an alternative to collecting epidemiological data, the Australian Government, through the Department of Health, has published a guideline on overseas-acquired Lyme disease, which is publicly available. The department recognises that many medical practitioners are not familiar with overseas-acquired Lyme disease and will undertake through an education and awareness raising endeavour to inform Australian medical practitioners of the importance of recognising overseas-acquired Lyme disease.
Recommendation 9
The committee recommends that Australian medical authorities and practitioners addressing suspected tick-borne illness:
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health, has a patient-centric approach to health care.
The department strongly supports the removal of the terms "Lyme Disease", "Lyme disease-like Illness" and "Chronic Lyme Disease" from diagnostic discussions. They are unhelpful and divisive.
At present, there is not a clear agreed alternative nomenclature. The term adopted by the Committee "suspected tick-borne disease" is presumptive and could be divisive. The department proposes to use the term "Debilitating Symptom Complexes Attributed to Ticks" (DSCATT) which NHMRC has now adopted to describe its TCR, to describe the heterogeneous nature of the debilitating symptom subgroups with acknowledgement that ticks may have a role.
Recommendation 10
The committee recommends that, to help the referral of patients for guided and comprehensive pathology testing, medical practitioners work with pathologists, especially microbiologists, immunologists, chemical pathologists and hæmatologists to optimise diagnostic testing for each patient.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health, supports this recommendation.
Recommendation 11
The committee recommends that the Australian Government Department of Health work closely with the Australian Medical Association and Royal Australian College of General Practitioners to ensure that general practitioners have a better understanding of how to treat patients who present with complex symptoms.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health, supports this recommendation and will continue to encourage the Australian Medical Association and the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners to raise awareness amongst its members of the need to care for patients presenting with debilitating symptom complexes attributed to ticks sympathetically and with compassion.
Recommendation 12
The committee recommends that treatment guidelines developed by Australian medical authorities emphasise the importance of a multidisciplinary, case conference approach to patient care, involving consultation between general practitioners and specialists with expertise in neurology, psychiatry, rheumatology, immunology, infectious diseases and microbiology.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health, strongly supports this recommendation and will work with state and territory health agencies under a national approach as proposed in Recommendation 6 of the report.
______________
1 https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants-funding/apply-funding/targeted-and-urgent-calls-research/research-debilitating
That the Senate take note of the document.
… the Government has gained a deeper appreciation and real concern for those Australians experiencing these chronic debilitating symptoms …
The Government remains engaged with patient and medical community to continue to find, share and understand the evidence associated with this medical conundrum.
The Australian Government through the Department of Health remains open-minded about the cause of the various complexes which manifest as constellations of chronic debilitating symptoms. The best outcome for patients is to not draw conclusions based on poor levels of evidence, but to consider each patient thoroughly in a multidisciplinary medical approach that makes the best use of clinical acumen and available diagnostic skills and technology.
The Australian Government, through the Department of Health recognises the need to direct funding to determine the cause or causes of the symptoms affecting these patients through research that is comprehensive, evidence-based and incorporates a multidisciplinary assessment.
The Australian Government ... recognises the need to direct funding to determine the cause or causes of the symptoms affecting these patients through research that is comprehensive, evidence-based ...
The committee recommends that federal, state and territory health agencies, through the Council of Australian Governments Health Council, develop a consistent, national approach to addressing tick-borne illness.
... the Department of Health would support consideration of a national approach via the Council of Australian Governments' Health Council ... and the Australian Health Ministers' Advisory Council ... to the comprehensive multidisciplinary management of these debilitating symptom complexes. The Government, however, emphasises the need for an open mind on causality ...
... the Australian Government, through the Department of Health, has published a guideline on overseas-acquired Lyme disease, which is publicly available.
That senators be discharged from and appointed to committees as follows:
Community Affairs Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Patrick
Economics Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Patrick
Education and Employment Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Patrick
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee—
Appointed—
Substitute member: Senator O'Neill to replace Senator Chisholm from Monday, 20 November to Friday, 24 November 2017
Participating members: Senators Chisholm and Patrick
Environment and Communications References Committee—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Patrick
Finance and Public Administration Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Patrick
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Senator Patrick
Future of Work and Workers—Select Committee—
Appointed—
Senator Steele-John
Participating members: Senators Bartlett, Di Natale, Hanson-Young, McKim, Patrick, Rhiannon, Rice, Siewert and Whish-Wilson
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Patrick
Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Patrick
Superannuation Laws Amendment (Strengthening Trustee Arrangements) Bill 2017
Corporate governance—
faces particular issues which need to be addressed and include:
… left school at 15 to take up an apprenticeship as a fitter at a local chain-making factory. Shortly after completing his apprenticeship the factory closed …
… emigrated to Australia in 1973 … He initially worked at the Garden Island Dockyard in Sydney, before moving to the Liddell Power Station in Muswellbrook—
… where he worked as a maintenance fitter. After seven years working at the power station Cameron was elected as the Hunter Valley/New England regional organiser for the Amalgamated Metal Workers and Shipwrights Union …