We'll now move to question time, and I call Senator Cabasic. My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. Minister, what is the total number of company insolvencies since you came to government in 2022? And can you confirm whether this number has grown or shrunk over this period? Thank you, Senator Cabasic. Minister Gallagher. Thank you very much, President, and I thank Senator for the question. I don't have the numbers that the Senator has asked for before me. There were some reports from Cosboa this morning in the media, and we understand that many businesses are under the pump because of the result of higher interest rates and some of the challenges that we talk about in this chamber from time to time in relation to our economy. And that's why the government has looked to find measures to support small business, including the energy bill relief. And I note from the media reports that one of the most pressing challenges for business was energy costs, which is why we targeted that measure, giving every small business $325 from memory to assist with some of those increasing costs. We're also responding to representations from Cosboa around investing in cyber preparedness, in cybersecurity, as it has been identified by small businesses, another area of pressure for them. And cyber security, cyber resilience, Senator Rustin, and Senator Rustin, thank you. And I am talking to you about the ways the government is looking to support small business through some of the challenges that they have raised with us. And they have raised energy, and we've responded to energy. They have raised cyber, we are responding to cyber, on instant asset write-off, the $20,000 for instant asset write-off, for small businesses, and that relief is helping. So we are focused on ensuring that we can support small business where we can. Insolvencies, insolvencies, unfortunately, Senator Kavacik, first supplementary. Minister, ASIC statistics have revealed company insolvencies hit 11,053 in 2324, with overall insolvencies since Labor was elected skyrocketing to 22,800 businesses. ASIC analysis shows these figures represent the worst average number of insolvencies per quarter under any government since records began in '99. Minister, how is sticky inflation and record high interest rates contributing to record insolvencies? I think you responded to this in my first question, acknowledging that inflation in the economy has been a challenge for small business. I accept that. I don't think anybody who follows the economy wouldn't have a view about that. But when we look at the rate of insolvencies, and I'm not saying this to dispute the fact that we acknowledge businesses feeling the pressure of the current economic circumstances, but insolvencies have averaged 0.24% under the Albanese government, the lowest on record for any government, lower than they were under Prime Minister Howard, lower than they were under Prime Minister Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison. So we will continue to look at ways to provide support for small business where the budget can fine room for it and respond to the priority areas that they have raised with us. When you've quite finished Senator Hughes, Senator Kavacik, second supplementary. A small business perspective report launched today states that operating conditions are arguably the most challenging in living memory and 57% of small business owners reported high stress due to financial strain, with one in three not paying themselves due to cash flow issues and 25% using personal savings to keep afloat. Minister, why should Australia's small businesses have to pay the price for the Albanese Labor Government's poor economic management? Thank you, Senator Kavacik. Before I call the Minister, I'm going to remind all senators that I expect senators to listen in respectful silence. Minister. Thank you. My response to that question is that we are doing what we can to support small business and to drive down inflation in this economy and the people that are seeking to block that and stop that are those opposite. It's a bit rich to come in here and go, "What are you doing? What are you doing when every vote you have in this Chamber is to oppose a measure the Government is putting in place to support people through a period of higher inflation?" You can sit there and raise questions, but the real measure is how you vote. When you vote in this place, you vote against energy bill relief. You vote against the cost of living measures that we have put in place. That is the reality and your voting record shows it. While we get on on this side, responding to challenges, engaging with Cosboa, looking at ways that we can support small business as the engine room of our economy, we will continue to do that, including in renewable energy space, which is a real opportunity for small business in this country. Thanks, President. My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. The Albanese Labor Government wants Australia to be a country that makes things here. We want Australia to be a country that produces renewable power in abundance, bringing down domestic power prices and exporting excess energy to the world. We want to make the most of our natural resources value adding here and strengthening our economic security. And we want our people skilled up to reap the benefits of this economic transformation. Minister, how will the Government's future made an Australia policy set up the Australian economy for the future? Thank you, Senator Green. Minister Gullahur. Thank you, President. I thank Senator Green for the question and for the interest and energy that she puts into the future made in Australia agenda. I heard, while Senator Green was asking her question, there are snipes from the no-alition, which is the combination of the opposition. And your friends, the Greens, your friends, the Greens, seeing that griping away, because I think most people outside of this Chamber would think on what grounds could anybody in any parliament vote against a future made in Australia. We know, as Senator White said yesterday, that those opposite vote against a future, they would like to go back to the past. We know that. They don't like the future. They're scared of the future. But a future made in Australia about jobs, about opportunity, about seizing our natural strength, about increasing manufacturing opportunities, and our sovereign capability after the COVID-19 pandemic. Who on earth could really stand and vote against a bill like that? But here we have it. Here is the Senate. For you, all to witness, we have those opposite voting against housing, voting against future made in Australia, voting against the renewable energy transition. Any major piece of economic transformation in this country, the opposition is opposed to it. If they could find their little alliance with the Greens and strengthen that, we know it makes Senator Dunyan uncomfortable. We know it does, Senator Dunyan. We know it's like forest and Tasmania. We don't really like to be in bed with the Greens. But here we go. Come to Canberra, and all we see is those opposite the no-alition working together to block a future made in Australia. Senator Green, first supplementary. Thank you, President. Minister, today we learnt that almost 80 per cent more women are training as apprentices in male-dominated trades. What opportunities exist for women in the Albanese Labor Government's future made in Australia agenda, and why is the government so focused on increasing economic opportunities for women? Thank you, Senator Green. Minister Galahur. Thank you, President. I thank Senator Green for that, and again, for advocating for the economic opportunities for women in this country. We know that the economic opportunities for this country going forward, the jobs, the technology, all of that, utilising all of our Labor capacity. That involves 50 per cent women. We don't want to see women locked out of opportunities or having to retrofit a gender-segregated workforce after it happens. We have been putting investment behind programs like the Building Women's Career Program to support more women to take and train in jobs in male-dominated industries. We have one of the highest—I can hear a groan over there—but we have one of the highest gender-segregated workforces in the developed world. We don't think, on this side of the Chamber, that women should lose out on any of the economic opportunities or the job opportunities going forward. Thank you, Minister. Senator Green, second supplementary. Well, thanks, President. Minister, a key focus of the Albany's Labor Government's future made in Australia agenda is the energy transformation. How do a future made in Australia initiative support the energy transformation? And what challenges has the government faced in responding to the energy transformation and in providing cheap, clean, electricity to Australians? Minister Galahoo. Thank you. I thank Senator Green for that question, because it is an important one. A key component of the future made in Australia agenda is about ensuring that we get the energy transformation right. Things like our production tax credits, things like making our supply chain more resilient, and particularly through solar, through our innovation fund, and through making sure that we met the geological opportunities, the potential of the entire country. This is just part of our future made in Australia agenda. We've got our rewiring the nation plan. We've also got providing, obviously, the private sector with the certainty they needed after what was it again, 10 years and 22 failed energy policies. And I think we're shaping up for a 23rd. This one, from opposition, I think we're going to see the 23rd failed energy policy, which is, of course, Mr Dutton's risky nuclear energy plan. A plan that hasn't been costed, has no detail, and even if they do do it, we're going to do a full set of our energies. Thank you, President. My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Watt. A report in the Daily Telegraph today revealed a Palestinian man, Mr Fayez El-Hassani, was granted a visa to Australia, despite once hosting political members of terrorist organisations Hamas and the Politburo of Palestinian Islamic Jihad at his Gaza Art Institute. Minister, can you confirm whether Mr El-Hassani was cleared by ASIO prior to his visa being granted? Minister Watt. Thank you, President. Thank you, Senator Chandler. Of course, these matters have been canvassed quite extensively this morning at question time in the House of Representatives, but I'm very, well, they were answers given. They might not just be the answers that you are hoping for, but there were accurate answers that were provided. I went to the trouble of getting a transcript of Minister Burke's answers. I'm surprised that you didn't bother to do the same yourself. But I'm very happy to repeat the comments that Mr Minister Burke made, and they were that we are working closely with our security agencies on this matter, as people would expect. Everyone from Gaza granted a visa since October 7th has been checked by our security agencies. That is the answer to the question. Every single person has been checked by our security agencies. I think the disturbing thing that we continue to see from the opposition is a complete lack of faith in our security agencies. We have seen that over and over again, and I think it's very concerning to see this creeping authoritarianism within the opposition. Last week we had the leader of the opposition, Mr Dutton, and other front benches demanding that state police go and arrest certain people. This week we've got the opposition trying to direct the security agencies as to what they would do. That's a little shadow and a little insight into the kind of operation we would have under a Dutton government if, God forbid, we ever had a Dutton government. What we know about Mr Dutton is that he has no limits. There are no limits to the authoritarian action that he will take. You will not get a member of the Albanese government directing the security agencies in the way that Mr Dutton seeks to do, and Senator Patterson seems to do. You won't get members of the Albanese government directing state police to go and arrest people, because there's this quaint old nation called the Separation of Powers. I know it's something the Queensland National Party never was able to understand, but it seems the Liberal Party doesn't understand it either. Thank you. Senator Mackenzie, lower your voice. Senator Chandler, first supplementary. The reporting also revealed Mr Elhasani had opened this meeting by stressing the need to support Palestinian resistance and confront the occupation by all possible means to restore rights and liberate the land. The Director-General of ASIO has previously said regarding visa security assessments, a tweet that says the 7th of October was acceptable. That's going to be a problem for that person. Minister, how is it that someone who has made these statements pass security checks and the character tests for an Australian visa? Thank you, Senator Chandler. Minister Watt. Thanks, President. Well, again, we see a direct attack on the independent security agencies from the Federal Opposition, an absolutely extraordinary situation that we continue to see. Senator Henderson, lower your voice. I know the Opposition don't want to see themselves characterised. Senator Hughes, equally lower your voice. At Senator Hughes, I'll call you to order. Minister, please continue. Thanks, President. I'll take the interjection from Senator Hughes. Senator Hughes just said, as a member of the Opposition, if you're just going to leave it to bureaucrats, then why are you here? That's the policy of the Federal Opposition, is that ministers in a Dutton Government would direct the national security agencies to make decisions rather than rely on the independent advice from National Security President of the Budget. Senator Chandler, or Arthur. But thank you, President, Point of Order. The minister is going nowhere near answering the question. It's a point of order of direct relevance. I didn't ask the question. Order, as you know, Senator Chandler, the Minister of Order. I am responding to the point of order. The minister is entitled to Senator Hughes when you've quite finished. Order, Senator Hughes, if you can't remain quiet, please leave the chamber. That's your choice. Senator Chandler, as you are aware, the minister is entitled to respond to interjections, so you could get your question more directly answered if you invited your colleagues not to make interjections. Minister, I would also remind you to direct your comments to the chair. Thanks, President. Well, as I say, what we see continually from the Federal Opposition is direct attacks on the independence of our national security agencies. The urban easy government is more than willing to rely on the advice from national security professionals as to the security credentials of any applicant for a visa. Our security agencies don't stop checking someone's national security credentials, the money they enter into Australia. And as further information comes to light, then advice is updated and we act on that advice. The only people who want to ignore our national security agencies are those who are listening opposite. I think it's a time for answering case expired. Senator Chandler, second supplementary. Yes, sir. Senator Chandler, please resume your seat. Senator Chandler, please resume your seat. Order. Senator Chandler was on her feet, waiting. Senator Mackenzie, it's about the fourth time I've called you this question time. I invite you to listen in silence or leave the chamber. It's your choice. Your colleague has been on her feet trying to ask the next question. Senator Chandler, second supplementary. Thank you, President. Can the minister guarantee that the urban easy Labor Government has not granted a single visa to any individual with links to a terrorist organisation? Thank you, Senator Chandler, Minister Wall. Thanks, President. Thanks, Senator Chandler. Well, the benefit of Senate question time happening after the House of Rep's question time is that you can refer back to the answers that House ministers provided to exactly the same questions that were asked four hours and about 19 minutes ago. Now, Minister Burke was asked this question and the guarantee that I can provide is exactly the same guarantee that Mr Dutton could have provided when he was the Home Affairs Minister and allowed for hundreds of people to enter Australia on visit of visas from war zones such as Afghanistan. When Mr Dutton was the Minister of Home Affairs, he granted 991 visitor visas from Afghanistan while it was in a war zone. So, I guess I can provide the same guarantee that Mr Dutton could provide there. When Mr Dutton was the Home Affairs Minister, 4,994 visitor visas were granted to people from Iraq while it was a war zone. So, I'll give you the same guarantee as Mr Dutton could do then. And 1,505 visitor visas were granted from Syria while Mr Dutton was the Minister as well. So, we're happy to provide the same guarantee as Mr Dutton. Thank you, Minister. The time for answering has expired. Senator Hughes, I've called you a number trimes during question time. I asked you to listen in silence or leave the chamber. It is your choice. I draw to the attention of honourable senators, the presence in the chamber of a delegation from the Parliament of New South Wales led by the honourable Ben Franklin, MLC, President of the Legislative Council and my friend and colleague on the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. On behalf of all senators, I wish you a warm welcome to the Senate and with the concurrence of honourable senators, I invite the President to take a seat on the floor of the Senate. I did suggest to the client we could have guest presenters, but he didn't really oblige. Yes, that's right, Senator Dunneham. Senator Hanson-Young. Thank you, President. My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Senator McAllister. Today, the Minister for Environment is hosting her Nature Positive Summit in Sydney. Yet in the last month alone, the Minister has approved three coal mines. Green lit the destruction of precious bushland in Mayana in New South Wales has not addressed the illegal destruction of koala habitat by coal mining company in Queensland. In the Parliament, the Prime Minister is refusing to negotiate with the Greens for Environment laws that actually work shouldn't the summit be more accurately called the Nature Negative Summit. I'm waiting to call the Minister, Minister McAllister. Minister McAllister. Well, thanks very much, President, and that was a long list of grievances, which effectively come down to a set of questions around why the Labor Party and why the Labor Government won't apply the law in the way that the Greens political party asserted should be applied, which is essentially on the vibe of themes. We actually take a very different approach. The approach taken by Minister Plutisick, as should be taken by all responsible parties of government, is to consider the matters placed before them, consider the evidence associated with those issues and those decisions that are required, and to then apply the law. That is the approach we take. It's not actually about considering the vibe of things and choosing projects that we like or people that we like or proponents we like, as you would suggest, and so frequently, shamefully, is suggested by those sitting opposite us. It's actually about applying the law. I'll tell you what, we are working incredibly hard to restore all of the damage and all of the destruction that has been wreaked upon our environment by the people opposite over the last decade. There was a wasted decade when so much could have happened and very little did, but we are working to it. We are seeking to set up our first environmental protection agency with strong powers, a new tough cop on the beat, and we would like the Greens party to support that. The Greens political party should support that legislation because it would be good for the environment and, incidentally, to provide a great deal of certainty for the business community. We have doubled funding to better look after national parts, including Kakadou and Uluru, out to the Liberals, let them fall apart. We are protecting Jabaloka from mining. We're adding it to the Kakadou National Park. We've protected an extra 40 million hectares of Australia's beautiful land and sea, an area bigger than German, and there's more to come. Triple the size of Macquarie Island marine pack. We kept the Great Barrier Reef off the World Heritage Endanger list. That's a set of achievements. Thank you Minister for answering that. Senator Hanson Young, first supplementary. Thank you, President. Could the Minister please tell me what is nature positive about approving three new coal mines that will create 1.4 billion tonnes of emissions out to 2060. We'll destroy hundreds of hectares of koala habitat. What is nature positive about your three new coal mines? Senator Pratt Order. Order. Senator Cash. Minister McAllister. Thank you, President. As I explained to the Senator and my answer to her primary question, the job of government is to make decisions based on the national environmental law and based on the facts. The truth is that the decisions that the Senator refers to extend three existing operations. These are not muted. The Minister please assume your seat. Order. Particularly Senator McKim. Minister, please continue. These are not new projects. The Senator essentially asks why these projects asks the Environment Minister to consider the emissions associated with these projects. The truth is that they are considered under laws that were developed and voted for in this chamber by the Greens political parties. The safeguard mechanism ensures that all new industrial facilities, including new and existing coal mines, are subject to binding limits, to reduce their direct emissions to net zero by 2050. That law is in place and it's a law that you voted for. The government has broken their promise to fix Australia's environment laws. The Prime Minister has told the mining lobby he wants to weaken them even further, contradicting his Environment Minister. The Prime Minister says one thing in WA. The Environment Minister says another thing in Sydney. Why has the Prime Minister rolled his Environment Minister? Thank you, Senator Hanson-Young. Order across the Chamber. Minister McCullough, resume your seat. Senator Mackenzie, seriously, your choice is to sit here in silence or leave the Chamber. Minister McCullough, please continue. Thanks very much, President. The truth is, Senator, that there are a set of laws before this chamber, which you could vote for. They are a set of laws that we committed to. We did say we wish to respond. Senator Hanson-Young, Senator Ken, you don't need—I don't need to hear the running commentary. You are being disrespectful. To the Chamber, Senator Hanson-Young, you're not in a debate with me. Minister McCullough, please continue. The Government has made it very clear, and this is from the Prime Minister down, that these are laws that should be supported in their current form, Senator, because there is something in this legislation for everyone. The new tough cop on the beat, the first-ever national EPA with strong powers and ability to issue orders, audit and monitor a bit of businesses to make sure they are doing the right thing. Those are measures that a party that claims to seek to protect the environment should vote for. Those are things that you should vote for. But it would be important for business too, because what business say is, they want certainty. These laws offer that, and it is a very great shame that the coalition refuses to support them. Thank you, Minister. Senator Gauss. Thank you, President. My question is to the Minister, representing the Minister for Communications, Senator McAllister. Minister, the NBN is critical infrastructure which reaches over 12.4 million premises across Australia, providing fast, reliable and affordable broadband across Australia. What is the Albanese Labor Government doing to secure this important public infrastructure for the future? I'm Minister McAllister. Well, thanks for the question, Senator Gauss, and you are right. The NBN is absolutely critical. It currently reaches over 12.4 million premises, and it's on track to deliver connectivity to 90% of houses and businesses across Australia by the end of 2025. It's an asset that strengthens connectivity, whoever you are and wherever you are, and we know that more than ever, it is essential that people have strong and reliable internet, it is not a luxury, it's an essential service. It impacts on how we work and live. It is also critical for sharing information during emergencies. Now, today, in the House of Representatives, the Albanese Government has introduced amendments to the National Broadband Network Companies Act that provide certainty for industry and to come consumers by securing ongoing public ownership, public ownership of the NBN. These amendments demonstrate the Government's ongoing commitment toward social, economic and employment benefits for Australia's President. It's actually vital. It's actually vital that the ongoing mission of the NBN should be guided by the public interest, not by the interests of shareholders, because it's in our national interest to have internet access that is affordable and accessible, and they reinforce that the NBN will remain in public hands for the foreseeable future. It's what we set up in the 2022 NBN Statement of Expectations. It also delivers on a commitment we made ahead of the 2022 federal election. We actually remember when those opposite rushed to declare that the NBN was complete, so they could sell it off, just so they could sell it off. We are working to ensure that the NBN is owned. Thank you, Minister. It's five times before our Council has expired. Senator Watt's order and Senator Dunneham. Senator Birmingham, I've got Senator Gosh on his feet. Senator Gosh, first up on the entry. What other investments and improvements have been made to support the delivery of the NBN across Australian premises in the last two years? Councillors interjecting. Minister McAllister. Thanks, President. Well, Labor has a proud history of investing in the NBN. It was established, of course, by a previous Federal Labor Government, because we knew back then what we know now, that access to fast and reliable and affordable internet is a necessity. Since coming to government, we have invested 2.4 billion to expand full fibre NBN access to 1.5 million additional premises. That includes 660,000 rural and regional communities. From September next year, millions of NBN customers will benefit from an increase in download speeds without two five times the current capability. No extra wholesale cost and we are rolling out more fibre in the fixed night network, upgrading the fixed wireless network and planning for future needs. We've connected over 18,000 families to free internet until the end of 2025 through the school student broadband initiative to ensure that no child experience is a digital decision. Thank you, Minister. That time for answering has expired. Senator Gosh, second supplementary. Thank you, Minister. How is the approach by the Albanese Labor Government different from the approach of previous governments and what risk is there to this critical communications infrastructure if this bill is not passed? Thank you, Senator Gosh, Minister McAllister. Well, it's a very good question, Senator Gosh, because I've heard the opposition calling out, interjecting, why is this legislation required? Well, I can tell you why. President, it is because those opposite will never pass up an opportunity to privatise critical infrastructure. Privatisation is in their D&A and you can look at their track record on communications infrastructure. First, they sold off Tealstra, and then they made an absoluteness of the NBN. For those in rural and regional Australia, communities that were already separated by distance, the coalition set them up for an enduring disadvantage, subjecting those communities to a second-rate NBN patch-up job. Keeping the NBN in public hands will ensure that that company is a certainty that is necessary for its investment planning, for its operational decisions, the decisions that are needed to maximise the economic and the critical social benefits. Thank you, Minister, the time for answering has expired. Senator Roberts. Thank you, President. My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Minister representing the Attorney General, Senator Watt. Last week, the Australian Federal Police publicised the case of a father who was convicted of attempting to force his 15-year-old and 17-year-old daughters into arranged marriages. For clarity, my question only relates to arranged marriages where either party is not given a choice. To respect the privacy of the children involved, Minister, my question goes to policy. Is human trafficking a 15-year-old girl into marriage sufficient grounds for deportation? If not, why not? Thank you, Senator Roberts. Minister Watt. Thank you, Senator Roberts, for the question. I don't have details as to the specific case that you're referring to, but certainly what I can say is that a breach of character grounds on an e-basis would be the basis for cancelling someone's visa and deporting them from Australia. So if it is the case that a crime has been committed in this case, or if character grounds in general were found to not be satisfied, then of course the outcome of that would be that a visa would be cancelled. As I say, I don't have enough details about the particular case involved, and you yourself were saying that you didn't want to go to the details of that case and wanted to talk more generally, but that is the general position when it comes to visas. If there's any further information I can provide, I'd be happy to do so. Thank you, Minister. Senator Roberts, first supplementary. Thank you. Minister forced marriage of a child carries a nine-year prison penalty, 25 years if the child is sent overseas for the marriage. Australian Federal Police Commander Kate Ferri described the offence as human trafficking, as does the Attorney General's website. Your answer downplayed a serious issue of women's rights and contradicts your own website. Minister, when 91 cases of forced marriage reported to the AFP in the year to June, when will you start deporting the offenders, including the clergy involved? Thank you, Senator Roberts. Minister Watt. Thanks, President. Thanks, Senator Roberts. Well, I mean, again, I don't have the details of those 91 cases, and I'm not certain that they all involve people who are in Australia on visas. I'd want to fact-check that before accepting that that was the case. But as I say, when it comes to visas that are granted to people to visit Australia, they come on conditions. And of course, any visa holder has responsibilities to the people of Australia while they're present in Australia. Ordinarily, what would occur is that if someone is convicted of an offence, and I don't know whether any of these individuals have been convicted of offences, but if that were to occur, then they would ordinarily serve their sentence in an Australian prison. And once they'd served their sentence, that would be the time at which they would be deported, that their visa would be cancelled. Ordinarily, as I understand it, we don't cancel people's visas before we put them in jail. If they've committed an offence, they would serve out their sentence in a jail, and then went on a release, that would be the time that their visa would be cancelled. Thank you, Minister. Senator Roberts, second supplementary. Minister, how many arrivals on permanent visas were deported for criminal activity in calendar 2023, or later if you have the data? For clarity, I don't want visa overstays or deportations on technical grounds. My question goes specifically to reluctance to deport for a serious criminal offence. Thank you, Senator Roberts. Minister what? Thanks, Senator Roberts. Well, again, I don't have that level of detail with me representing the Attorney General, but if there's information that I can provide to answer your question, I'd be happy to provide that. What I can say is that obviously it's a matter for police if there is an allegation of a crime. As I say, I'm not across the details of this particular report that you're referring to. I'm not aware of whether the person has been charged or convicted, but it's a matter for police. It's a case you've seen your seat, Senator Roberts. Standing order 7223C says that answers shall be directly relevant to each question. I'm not after the details on this question. What we want to know is how many arrivals and permanent visas were deported for criminal activity in calendar 2023, or later if you have the data? Senator Roberts, you simply needed to have stood and said relevance. The Minister was relevant. He indicated in the first part of his answer that if he could get more detail, he would, and he is entitled to continue his answer. Minister, what? Please continue. Thank you, President. As I say, Senator Roberts, I'm happy to provide any further details in addition to anything that I do have here. What I am aware of is that there's been significantly more visa cancellations occur under this Government than ever then occurred while Mr Dutton was the Home Affairs Minister. That's something I can tell you, but I'm happy to come back to you with additional details once they come to hand. Thank you, Minister. Senator Dutton. Thank you, President. My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. On the 25th of September in Tasmania, the Prime Minister said that his Government had not exempted the Queensland Olympic Infrastructure from GST calculations. Your Treasury documents show these projects have actually been exempt from GST calculations. Minister, are the Treasury documents wrong or did the Prime Minister mislead Tasmanians? Can you confirm to the Senate whether or not these projects for Queensland Olympics infrastructure are indeed exempt from GST calculations? Thank you, Senator Dunneham. Minister Gallagher. Thank you, and I thank Senator Dunneham for the question. I don't have details of that before me. I do know that states regularly, all states regularly seek exemptions for a range of different projects, including the Tasmanian State Government from time to time, from GST considerations, and they are dealt with through appropriate processes and decision-making. I don't have the specifics of the arrangements on the Queensland Olympic Infrastructure. With me, nor the comments that you say the Prime Minister said in Tasmania, I'm happy to see if there's any further information I can provide the Chamber. Of course, we are the Government that is looking to fund and support, co-fund. Councillor, please resume your seat. Senator Dunneham? President, by way of support for the Minister, I'm happy to table the documents from the Treasury website. Thank you. Well, forgive me for not accepting all—no, for the way the question has been asked and for saying that if there is any further information I can provide to the Chamber, I will undertake to do so. But it is not unusual for states to seek GST exemptions for infrastructure. I would think every single state has applied to do so over the last few years, and it goes through the appropriate decision-making and accountability processes for those decisions. Of course, the way GST is distributed is a matter for the Commonwealth Grants Commission. Again, there's a range of views about how that GST is shared or allocated and how the relativities are come to, and there isn't universal agreement across the states about that either. Thank you, Mr. Senator Dunneham, first supplementary. Thanks, President. The Prime Minister, on 25 September, also suggested that as Infrastructure Minister, he never signed off on anything exempt from GST in Tasmania, except there is a document that he signed dated 2 October when he was Minister for Infrastructure, exempting $50 million of payments to the Tasmanian Government for the Macquarie Point precinct from GST calculations. Minister can I ask, who is right? The Prime Minister at his press conference on 25 September, or the document he claimed he didn't sign in the year 2012. Thank you, Senator Dunneham. Minister Gulliver, I'm wondering why... Well, the Minister is on her feet. Minister, please resume your Senators on my left and my right. Order. Thank you, President, and I thank Detective Dunneham for the question. Look, if there is... Forgive me for what Minister Gulliver, I do remind you, you do need to... Sorry. Senator Dunneham. Thank you. Senator Dunneham. Thank you. I don't have, again, I haven't seen the transcript from which he's reading. I haven't got that detail in front of me, as I said. There is universal disagreement about this matter across the federation between states, particularly about what should be included for the relativities process and what shouldn't be. I know there has been exemptions from time to time, not for all the exemptions that have been sought across all of the states across Australia. I think, you know, if there is further information I can provide, I'll come back. Thank you, Minister. Senator Dunneham, second supplementary. Thank you, President. Given the Prime Minister cited Queensland not getting an exemption for Tasmania being not able to get an exemption for its stadium funding, and him not signing off on the Macquarie Point Precinct funding for Tasmania to not get a GST exemption, now we know that both of those projects got an exemption. Will the Australian Government do the right thing by Tasmanians and give us our GST back? Order. Order. Order. Senators on my left and right, particularly on my right, the Tasmanian senators, come to order. Minister Gallagher. Thank you. Well, the decisions about how GST are distributed are made by the Commonwealth Grants Commission are made by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, where a relativity is provided through annual reviews. Minister Gallagher, please resume your seat. Minister Wong. If we could try and actually listen to what Senator Gallagher is saying. Well, Minister Wong, you may have noticed I have been calling the Chamber to order since we commence question time. I don't think I've been very successful, but I will try again. And ask senators to listen in respectful silence whilst the Minister is answering the question. Minister Gallagher. Thank you. And so the Commonwealth Grants Commission is responsible for determining the relativities for each state. I know that each state and territory usually participates in that and argues about why they should get more share of the GST than another state through direct consultation. Minister Gallagher, Senator Birmingham, wait till I call you and then raise the point of order. Senator Birmingham. President, the Finance Minister is willfully seeking to mislead the Senate in her presentation of the arguments that the reality is that the Government decides extensions, not the Commonwealth Grants Commission, that is a debating point. Minister Gallagher. President, and Senator Dunnean asked me about GST distribution, essentially. That was his question around will Tasmania get some GST back. I'm saying the way the GST allocations are made are through the Commonwealth Grants Commission. So I completely reject Senator Birmingham's assertion there. This is done by direct submission and assessment by the Commonwealth Grants Commission. They determine and have always determined the distribution of GST. Thank you, Minister Gallagher. Senator Thorpe. Thank you, President. My question is for the Minister for Indigenous Australians. Minister, do you agree that children's human rights are being regularly violated in this country? Thank you, Senator Thorpe, Minister McCarthy. Thank you, President. Thank you, Senator Thorpe, for the question. We were able to announce last week a National Commissioner for Indigenous children in Australia. President, please resume your seat. Senator Thorpe, relevance. It was a simple question. Senator Thorpe, the Minister has just started her response. I will listen carefully and, if necessary, I will direct her to your question. Minister McCarthy. Thank you, President. Last week we announced the National Commissioner for Indigenous Children because we see it as incredibly important that the high rates of the removal of First Nations children in this country is way too high. So we certainly see that there is a real concern for First Nations children in Australia. Thank you, Minister. Senator Thorpe, first supplementary. It's not good enough that you can't clearly acknowledge that children's human rights are being abused. We have 10-year-olds being strip-search, Minister, in your electorate, in your state territory. So, as Minister, are you and your government not bound by the human rights obligations this government is signed up to? And please don't ramble. Just answer. Senator Thorpe, just ask your question. Thank you. Minister McCarthy. President, thank you. I look forward to answering the question and, given the time that I have, I think it's important to be able to alert the Senate and the significance of trying to care for our children, but all Australian children, President. It is of concern that children, in particular First Nations children, end up in custody, end up in detention. And that is why we have announced a First Nations Indigenous Children's Commissioner because we want to see the low rates and the rates reduced across the country, but obviously not just for Indigenous children, but for all children. Thank you, Minister. Senator Thorpe, second supplementary. I'm saying children in prison are routinely subjected to violence, abuse and neglect. Two children who would deny basic mental health care have died by suicide in child prisons that your government and new support in the last year. Will the federal government stop facilitating the abuse of children in this country and take action, or will you just keep avoiding responsibility and blaming the states? Thank you, Senator Thorpe, Minister McCarthy. Well, thank you, President. I certainly reject outright any assertion by the Senator that we are individually responsible for what's going on. It is clearly not. Minister McCarthy, please resume your seat, Senator Thorpe. Relevance to the question. Senator Thorpe, the Minister is being directly relevant to your question. Please resume your seat, and I'll call the Minister to continue her answer. Minister McCarthy. Thank you, President. It is clearly concerning. I have asked you to resume your seat. Thank you. Minister, please continue. Good leg exercises, President. It is clearly concerning, of course. Minister McCarthy at Senator Thorpe. Relevance. This is not a joke. There are children dying in prisons under your watch. So resume your seat. Order. Order. Senator Thorpe, come to order. Order. Thank you, President. It is clearly a serious concern. Senator Cash, come to order. Minister, please continue. It is a concern, President, of the high rates of First Nations youth, but First Nations people in custody across the country. I certainly spent time in Western Australia visiting the Banksier Detention Centre to work and to look at what was going on with our First Nations children in that centre. I've certainly been working with trying to see that we have already thought our Aboriginal medical centres in detention centres across the country. It is a process that Minister Mark Adler and I are working on. Minister, the time for answering has expired. Senator Sheldon. My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Senator Watt. I note the Albanese Labor Government's workplace relations agenda is specifically designed to help Australians deal with cost to living pressures and get wages moving. Because of this agenda, rural wages are finally growing after 10 years of deliberate stagnation by those opposite under Mr Dutton and the Liberals and Nationals. Minister, how is the Albanese Labor Government supporting wages growth and how do these policies help these cost-living pressures on Australian workers? Senator Sheldon, order. Senator Cash, I've called you to order a number of times this question time. Minister Watt. Thank you, President, and thank you, Senator Sheldon. Well, isn't it interesting that if there's one thing that will set off the opposition, it's the idea that workers get paid fair wages. The horror, the horror that workers would get paid fair wages, that you can be guaranteed, they'll go off about that, because they always want to drive wages down. Now, we know on this side of the Chamber that people in Australia are doing it tough right now, and cost of living is front and centre of people's minds and it's the top of our government's priorities as well. That's why we've delivered tax cuts, fairer tax cuts, opposed by the opposition. Energy bill relief, opposed by the opposition. More billing, opposed by the opposition. Cheaper childcare, opposed by the opposition. Cheaper medicines, opposed by the opposition. Rant assistance, opposed by the assistant and hex relief for students and graduates. We're yet to have the vote, but I reckon that'll probably be opposed by the opposition as well. That's because every bit of relief matters to Australians, and unlike the opposition, the Albanese Labor government also sees strong wages growth as a key part of the cost of living solution, not the problem. When we came to government, annual real wages were falling by 3.4%. Wages were falling compared to inflation dramatically, so it's no wonder that Australians were feeling cost of living pressures. It wasn't an accident that we saw that under the coalition, because, of course, we know that they openly said that low wages was a deliberate design feature of their economic policy. Now that they're in opposition, Mr Dutton and the coalition have continued that approach, voting against almost every single measure to get wages moving, and now they're threatening to take it all away. After a decade of attacking workers and deliberate wage suppression under the Liberals and Nationals, real wages are growing again at the same time as we're driving down inflation and keeping industrial action low. Labor's changes are working as we intended. In the last fortnight alone, we saw average private sector pay rises in new enterprise agreements hit 4% for the first time in 12 years, with the highest number of workers coming back. Senator Sheldon, first supplementary. I know that Mr Dutton and the Liberals and Nationals have opposed these wage rises every step of the way. How are the Albanese government's reforms helping Australians with the cost of living? Why is it so important that Australian households earn more and keep more of what they earn? Thank you, Senator Sheldon. Minister what? Thanks, Senator Sheldon. It is important at a time of cost of living pressures that Australians are earning more and keeping more of what they earn. That is what's happening under the Albanese Labor government. As I said, in the last fortnight, we saw average private sector pay rises in new enterprise agreements hit 4% per annum for the first time in 12 years. How long was the coalition in power? Ten years. The first time in 12 years, that must have been the last time. Labor was in power that we saw private sector pay rises hit 4% per annum. We've also seen the gender pay gap fall to historic lows under the Albanese Labor government and annual real wages have been growing now for three consecutive quarters. Now, that wasn't what we saw from Mr Dutton and Senator Cash, who told us that we would be entering the dark ages and closed down the Australian economy if we passed our IR laws. In fact, what's happening is that wages are increasing, industrial action is falling, more jobs are being created than ever before and Australians are moving forward. Senator Cash may I invite you to make your contribution at take note, not during question time? Senator Sheldon, first supplementary. Well, given Mr Dutton and the Liberals and Nationals have committed to making targeted repeals of our workplace relations changes, and Senator Hume has claimed that adding more rights for workers is unreasonable, one of the key barriers to creating jobs and getting wages moving, and why is the Albanese Labor government so committed to delivering well-paid, secure jobs for Australian workers? My apologies, Senator Sheldon, that was the second supplementary and I call the Minister. Thanks, Senator Sheldon. Well, the Albanese Labor government wants to see Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn, whereas Mr Dutton and the Coalition want Australians to work longer for less. Now, we know that's the case because that is their record every time they've been in government, when they had an anti-worker and anti-union agenda, and now they're in opposition, they're committed to ripping away rights for casual workers and forcing workers to do unpaid overtime by removing the right to disconnect. We saw Senator Hume recently confirm that they are going to take a sledgehammer to wages and conditions and review multi-employer bargaining, and as Senator Sheldon said, Senator Hume, on TV, it's there for you to have a look at described more rights for workers as unreasonable. What a terrible thing for workers to have rights. That would be a disgraceful thing, it would be unreasonable. Well, that's what we saw from Senator Hume, it would be unreasonable for workers to have more rights. Well, what it means for early education workers is $155 more per week under Labor than what they were getting out of the Coalition, and that's what will happen the more workers in the Coalition where everyone likes it. Senator Renek. My question is to the Minister representing the Minister of Industry and Science. Senator Hume. Senator Renek, I invite you to begin your question again and to reset the clock. Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Industry and Science, Senator Farrell. In an answer to a question on notice asking for the model used to prove that reducing CO2 emissions to net zero by 2050 will actually achieve a 1.5 degree reduction in global temperatures. The CSO replied that there are over 40 global climate models used around the world. Why should the Australian taxpayer stump up billions of dollars in subsidies for renewable energy when the scientific experts can't even agree on the method used to calculate CO2 emissions and its impact on the temperature? Thank you, Senator Renek. Minister Farrell. Thank you, President, and I thank Senator Renek for his question, and it's pleasing to see somebody in this place has got an interest in science and industry. Look, I don't know the specifics of your question off the top of my head. Of course, this is not my policy area. We have a very fine minister. We have a very fine minister in Senator Hussek. It looks after this area. I will get an answer to your question from him as soon as I can. But can I say this that I don't think the science is in dispute about the need to move to net zero, Senator Renek. Australia is unique. Minister Farrell, please resume. Senator Renek. Point of order, Chair. The question is about how it's being measured, not whether or not it's in dispute, but how it's being measured and the accuracy and quality assurance of those measurements. There was an introduction to your question, which I think the minister is being relevant to the question, and I will continue to listen carefully. Thank you, Senator Renek. Minister Farrell. Thank you, President, and thank you for that support. Look, I've said to you quite honestly, Senator Renek, I don't have the specific details to answer that question, but I will get them for you. But I'm making the general point that the need to move to net zero is not in dispute. This country is uniquely placed, not only to move to net zero for our own economy, but to assist the rest of the world. One of the areas that I'm very directly involved in is the issue of critical minerals, and Australia is very, very fortunate in that we have an overabundance of those critical minerals that we're going to need to move to net zero. Thank you, Minister. The time for answering has expired, Senator Renek, first supplementary. The black summer bushfires triggered a massive photoplankton bloom the size of Australia in the southern ocean. Photoplankton is the biggest carbon sink on the planet, and according to the CSIRO, it absorbs 30% of human CO2 emissions. Yet, when asked in estimates if photoplankton is used as the CO2 offset when calculating net zero, the CSIRO said it wasn't. Why isn't photoplankton being used as a CO2 offset when calculating net zero? Thank you, Senator Renek. Minister Farrell. Thank you, President. Thank you, Senator Renek, for his first supplementary question. I wasn't present during those questions. I don't believe, but I shall make contact with the CSIRO and seek to get an answer to your question as quickly as I can, Senator Renek. Thank you, Minister. Senator Renek, second supplementary. In relation to a one-and-a-half degree reduction in temperature, two executives at the Bureau of Meteorology were recently castigated for giving evidence to a federal court judge that was false and unreliable and a deliberate attempt to mislead the court. The case comes after it was revealed that the Bureau was no longer meeting its obligations in upper air monitoring. Given this behaviour, why should the public trust anything the Bureau says about weather records? Senator Renek, your second sub should really relate to your primary question in your second supplementary. It is hard to—I'm ruling on this, so I don't need input. It is hard to see that, but I would invite the Minister to respond to your question as he sees fit. Thank you, Senator Renek. Thank you, Senator Renek, for his second supplementary question. Again, I'm not familiar with those issues that you raised or the proceedings that you referred to. Again, I will get a detailed response for you and provide that to you, Senator Renek, as quickly as I can. Thank you, Minister. Senator Stewart. Thank you. My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Australian Senator McCarthy. I'm sure that everyone in this chamber can agree that the rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait are children and young people out of home care is clearly unacceptable. First Nations children are 11 times more likely to be in out of home care compared to non-Indigenous children. Can the Minister outline what steps are being taken to reverse these statistics for our children? Thank you, Senator Stewart. Minister McCarthy. Thank you, President. My thanks, Senator Stewart, for your question. The Albanese Labor Government is committed to achieving better outcomes for First Nations children, young people, and their families. We are committed to a national commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people, and we are delivering on that commitment. The over-representation of First Nations children in out of home care continues to trend upwards. Closing the gap target 12, which aims to reduce the over-representation of First Nations children in out of home care by 45% by 2031 is not on track. The Productivity Commission found that nationally, as at 30 June 2023, the rate of First Nations children aged zero to 17 years in out of home care was worsening. The National Commissioner will be dedicated to protecting and promoting the rights, interests and well-being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people across a range of issues, including the over-representation of Indigenous children in out of home care. Thank you, President. I thank the Minister for outlining the government's commitments to improving outcomes for First Nations children. Can the Minister tell us more about the Independent National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people, and how the National Commissioner will better support outcomes for First Nations children? Thank you, Senator Stewart, Minister McCarthy, First supplementary for the first supplementary. Thank you, President. While many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people are doing well, the outcomes for some have just not improved, and this role represents a key step forward in the Government's commitment to listen to and meaningfully engage with First Nations people, and this is how to promote systemic change. The new National Commissioner will complement and not duplicate the roles of the National Children's Commissioner. The new National Commissioner will provide expert advice on the development and delivery of policies, programs and services to ensure they meet the unique needs of First Nations children and young people drawing on their work and consultation with community. The National Commissioner for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people will have a specific focus on protecting and promoting the rights, interests and well-being of First Nations children and young people across Australia. Thank you, Minister. Senator Stewart, Second supplementary. I thank the Minister. It is great to hear about the plans for the National Commissioner. How have organisations and peaks in the sector, who are the experts here, responded to the Government's initiative to establish an independent National Commission and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people? Thank you, Senator Stewart, Minister McCarthy. Thank you, President. Will the role respond to long-standing calls from First Nations stakeholders for stronger accountability for the outcomes experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people, including as recently indicated in the Productivity Commission's review of the National Agreement on Closing the Gap. Safe and supported Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership group members along with other First Nations reps have specifically called for a National Commissioner. In particular, Snake, the National Voice for Our Children have called the announcement a game-changer. CEO Catherine Little said the National Commissioner will be the champion, the voice and facilitator for our children, young people and families and who will hold governments to account. Catherine Little goes on to say they will help turn the tide. President, I want to thank Snake for working with the Government on the development of this Commission, and look forward to continuing our productive relationships. Thank you, Minister. Minister Wong. Thank you. I ask that further questions be placed on notice.
