Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That these bills be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speeches read as follows—

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S PORTFOLIO MISCELLANEOUS MEASURES BILL 2023

The Attorney-General's Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures Bill 2023 will make a range of important amendments to update, clarify and improve the intended operation of legislation administered by the Attorney- General.

The Bill will enhance the capacity of the Australian court system to deal with corporate criminal offences and enable a more efficient jury preparation process in the Federal Court of Australia.

The Bill will also deliver on the Government's election commitment to abolish the Native Title Respondents Scheme.

The Bill will:

Federal Court criminal jurisdiction

The Bill will confer jurisdiction on the Federal Court to hear and determine a range of indictable corporate criminal offences within the responsibility of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. This is an important step in the development of the Federal Court's criminal jurisdiction, which was last significantly expanded in 2009 when jurisdiction was conferred in relation to indictable cartel offences. The Federal Court has considerable expertise in civil, commercial and corporate matters, and is well-positioned to deal with this expanded criminal jurisdiction.

This jurisdiction will operate concurrently with the existing jurisdiction of State and Territory courts. This will enhance the overall capacity of Australia's court system and support the Australian Securities and Investment Commission to more efficiently prosecute corporate criminal conduct.

In the interests of effective and efficient administration of justice, the Bill will also provide for proceedings in relation to corporate crime offences to be transferred to the most appropriate court, having regard to the interests of justice.

Neither the concurrent conferral of jurisdiction, nor the transfer provision, will interfere with the independence of State and Territory courts or the powers of Supreme Court Chief Justices to manage and allocate cases within their jurisdiction.

To support the efficient resolution of criminal proceedings, the Bill will confer jurisdiction on the Federal Court to hear and determine summary offences which arise from substantially the same facts as primary indictable offences being heard in the Court. This will avoid the possibility of prosecutors having to commence new proceedings in a State or Territory court in relation to the related summary offence.

The Legislative and Governance Forum on Corporations was consulted in relation to Schedule 1 of this Bill, as required under the Corporations Agreement 2002 and the National Credit Law Agreement 2009.

Federal Court juries

The Bill seeks to improve the efficiency of jury preparation processes by allowing State and Territory jury officials to provide a jury panel to the Federal Court. This will be in addition to the existing powers of the Sheriff of the Federal Court to prepare a jury panel. To respect the independence of States and Territories, the consent of the relevant State or Territory will be required before the Sheriff can request a State or Territory jury official to provide a jury panel.

Repeal section 213A of the Native Title Act 1993

Section 213A of the Native Title Act 1993 will be repealed to give full effect to the Government's election commitment to abolish the Native Title Respondents Scheme. Abolition of the Native Title Respondents Scheme was a commitment taken to the 2022 election and will save $6.4 million over 4 years from 2022-23. Many significant questions of native title law have now been settled and the Government considers that many current native title respondents, which are generally commercially viable or sound entities, would have the capacity to deal with native title matters as part of their ordinary business costs.

Amendments to the Marriage Act 1961

The Bill will make minor amendments to the Marriage Act 1961 to clarify and improve the operation of the Marriage Celebrants Program and provide greater accessibility for marrying couples.

The amendments will improve accessibility by permanently allowing the option of virtual witnessing for Notices of Intended Marriage. Marrying couples, particularly those in rural and regional areas, will greatly benefit from this change.

To ensure the foundational requirement of consent is safeguarded, a complementary amendment requires authorised celebrants to meet independently and in person with each party to a marriage before they solemnise the marriage.

The reasons for transferring a Notice of Intended Marriage have also been extended to allow for circumstances where the marrying couple wants to change their celebrant.

The amendments will clarify that an authorised celebrant can only be registered in one subdivision at any time, and that marriage must be solemnised in the physical presence of an authorised celebrant.

The identity requirements to be provided to an authorised celebrant will be clarified by providing that a statutory declaration can be used to provide identity details if it is impracticable to obtain an official record of birth and the person does not have a current passport.

The Commonwealth Marriage Celebrants Program will be improved by extending the timeframe for assessing applications to allow applicants the best opportunity to complete their applications and inserting a power to refund application fees in the Marriage Act where an applicant does not have the mandatory qualification.

Deputy registrars will be able to be appointed to assist the Registrar of Marriage Celebrants to, among other things, process the large volume of applications to become a marriage celebrant.

Arbitration

The Bill makes technical amendments to the arbitration framework in the Family Law Act 1975. The amendments will allow parties and arbitrators to make applications for review of an arbitral award or to determine a question of law to both Divisions of the Federal Circuit and Family Court. These amendments remove the administrative burden on the Federal Circuit and Family Court arising from the current need to transfer these applications from Division 2 to Division 1 for determination.

Conclusion

This Bill will deliver a range of amendments to legislation administered by the Attorney-General, to provide lasting benefits to Australia's legal system.

And I commend the Bill to the House.

AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH COUNCIL AMENDMENT (REVIEW RESPONSE) BILL 2023

Australia accounts for only 0.3 per cent of the world's population, but we do 3 per cent of global research.

We make an outsized contribution to global knowledge—about 10 times what you'd expect looking at our population alone.

Pound for pound we're one of the most important contributors to global knowledge and innovation.

Australian research has literally changed the world.

And a key part of that is the work done by the Australian Research Council.

The ARC plays a unique role in this country.

It supports basic and applied research across all disciplines except medical research.

No other agency does this.

And it does this to the tune of more than $895 million in research grants this financial year.

That funding supports more than 5,900 new and ongoing grants.

The ARC doesn't just fund research. It acts as an important safeguard on research integrity. It also provides advice and support to the Australian Government on research matters.

And it has a proven track record in nurturing and

producing the kind of research and results that keep Australia at the cutting edge of innovation.

And that has an economic benefit too.

According to work done by ACIL Allen, every dollar of National Competitive Grants Program funding administered by the ARC generates more than three dollars of economic output.

That's a return on investment you don't see in many places.

And that return not only supports our economy.

It also enhances our reputation internationally as thinkers and doers.

And leaders in research.

Over the last 22 years the ARC has supported the work of brilliant Australians who have repaid that government investment with some extraordinary achievements.

Achievements like bringing the internet to Australia.

Getting quantum computing off the ground.

Driving the uptake of solar panels on rooftops here and overseas.

And helping the world respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.

But in those 22 years, neither the ARC nor the legislation that underpins it had been comprehensively reviewed.

And that legislation hasn't kept up with the times.

In 2001, when the ARC was established the hottest new consumer technology was the Apple iPod.

Facebook and YouTube didn't exist.

The mapping of the human genome was still in the "working draft"phase.

For most people connection to the world wide web started with unplugging your landline and waiting for that weird cacophony of connection sounds.

And we only had four Star Wars movies.

That's how long it's been.

That's how much we've changed.

That's two decades spent without lifting the hood on the ARC legislation to see what's working and what we might do better.

And what we need to do to protect the independence of our research sector.

The fact is in recent times the ARC has been bedevilled by political interference and Ministerial delays.

At least four Ministers have interfered on at least six occasions during the former Government to upend the independent peer review process.

Interference and delays make it harder for universities to recruit and retain staff, and it damages our international reputation.

That's not good for our universities, and it's not good for business either who want to work with our universities.

And that's why last year the Minister for Education appointed Professor Margaret Sheil AO, Professor Susan Dodds and Professor Mark Hutchinson to conduct the first comprehensive review of the ARC Act.

Their terms of reference were broad.

The Minister for Education wanted the review team to have a really close look at this and tell us what needs to be done to make the ARC fit for today's research environment and prepare it for tomorrow's.

To consult widely.

To speak to people across the research ecosystem. Researchers. University and other higher education providers. Traditional knowledge owners. Research organisations here and overseas. Industry groups. Peak Bodies. And Government.

This they did and the Minister for Education sincerely thanks them for that work. In April the Minister for Education received the review team's report.

They concluded that we need to strengthen the ARC's governance arrangements.

To bolster its independence.

To get the politics out of it.

To end the days of Ministers vetoing things they didn't like the title of.

Professor Sheil and the review team made 10 recommendations and in August the Minister for Education announced that the Government agreed or agreed in principle to all of them.

The Minister for Education has already requested the ARC to commission work to implement three of them.

They are:

1. that we help universities attract and retain talented academics through meaningful Fellowships and promoting academic careers in research;

2. that we advance the support for Indigenous Australian academics through better consultation and additional Fellowships;

3. that we encourage more consultation between the ARC and stakeholders in the academic and research community

That work is already underway.

A fourth recommendation concerning the evaluation of excellence, impact and research capacity within Australian universities has been considered as part of the Australian Universities Accord.

The remaining six recommendations require legislative amendments and they are addressed in this bill which amends the ARC Act.

The bill amends the objects of the Act so that they clearly define the important role and place of the ARC in supporting Australia's research community.

The bill also establishes an ARC Board as the accountable authority of the ARC. This was recommended by the Review team to strengthen the independence and integrity of the ARC.

The Board will be appointed by the Minister and the bill includes eligibility requirements to ensure that members are appropriately qualified, with the majority of members to have substantial experience or expertise in one or more fields of research, or in the management of research.

The Board will also include a First Nations person, and a regional, rural and remote representative, and be supported by an ongoing ARC Advisory Committee with expertise across research, industry and governance.

The Board will appoint the ARC's Chief Executive Officer, and approve the appointment of members to Board committees, including the College of Experts.

Importantly, the Board will approve research grants under the National Competitive Grants Program.

This is one of the critical changes recommended by the Review. Under the existing Act, these decisions are made by the Minister.

Every decision. On thousands of grants.

Over time this has allowed for political interference to seep into what should be an independent, peer reviewed process aimed at expanding our nation's knowledge base.

The establishment of the Board as the approving body will get the politics out of this.

It re-establishes peer review as the driving principle in grant approvals.

Peer review is the accepted world standard for achieving quality in research grant outcomes. International collaboration and credibility also rely on having access to resources on a merit basis.

The reforms in this bill will send a strong signal that the Government supports research selection processes that are based on research excellence and sound due diligence.

Some important powers are retained by the Minister in this bill.

The Minister will be responsible for setting the funding rules to be followed by the Board in making grant decisions. These funding rules will be a disallowable legislative instrument.

This will safeguard against future Ministers attempting to use the ARC as a political plaything without the oversight of the Parliament.

The Minister will also retain powers to approve funding for nationally significant investments.

This is not about individual research grants, but investing in projects which can drive research, infrastructure, training and collaboration. The machinery and the engine rooms of research.

Projects like the ARC Centres for Excellence, Industrial Transformation Training Centres, and Industrial Transformation Research Hubs. Other designated research programs may be specified by the Minister through a disallowable legislative instrument.

The Minister will also have the power to direct the Board not to approve a grant, or to terminate funding for a grant and where appropriate require repayment, based on national security grounds.

When that happens, the Minister must notify the Parliament and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. The ARC's annual report will specify the number of times these powers have been exercised.

Finally, the bill replaces the Special Appropriation arrangements for ARC's administered funding with Annual Appropriation arrangements, providing funding visibility for the sector.

The Minister for Education again thanks Professors Sheil, Hutchinson and Dodds for the mountain of work they did in conducting this review, and thanks Dr John Byron and Dr Natalie Jones-Jayasinghe for their stellar work in supporting them.

Their collective commitment to this task, their wisdom and deep expertise have been invaluable.

The Minister for Education also thanks the ARC CEO Judi Zielke and her team for the important work that they have done and the work that they are doing now with the Department of Education to implement the Review's recommendations.

As a nation we are rightly proud of our reputation in research and the measures in this bill will help support the discoveries and innovations of the future.

They will modernise the ARC, strengthen it and build more trust in it so it can continue to spur innovation and catalyse productivity in the years ahead.

The bill is commended to the Senate.

COAG LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2023

Introduction & Context—Federalism to COAG

Australia Federated for a better future for our people.

This Bill backs the Federation and ensures we are best placed to meet our shared challenges.

In 1900, Australians "agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth".

The arguments for cooperation were as strong in 1900 as they are today.

As The Commonwealth League in Adelaide argued in 1898:

"To give better opportunities to our children";

"To promote the prosperity of Australia"; and

"To develop resources, trade and manufactures".

Western Australia was the last state to agree.

They were urged to "Complete the union by voting YES".

And they did.

Ever since, this Parliament has acted to ensure the Commonwealth, states and territories collaborate and learn from each other.

Close and ongoing cooperation between governments is also critical to driving policy reform nationally.

The federal system is the backbone to critical services such as education.

Healthcare.

Environmental protection.

All which require strong collaboration between the Commonwealth and states and territories.

Mechanisms for intergovernmental co-operation and interaction have changed over the years.

Prior to Federation, the 1890 Australasian Federal Conference and subsequent Australasian Federal Conventions hosted the premiers of Australian colonies.

The 1891 Federal Convention spent 5 weeks discussing and writing a draft constitution.

This became the basis for the constitution we have today.

Subsequent conventions would continue to debate changes over nine years.

Significant topics of contention were tariffs and defence.

Tariffs provided the colonial governments with much revenue but they restricted trade and movement between the colonies.

Following Federation, all duties on intra-Australian trade were abolished and a common external tariff was imposed.

Our domestic economy is forever stronger for the removal of intra-Australian duties.

Prior to Federation, the colonies were ill-equipped to defend themselves.

Each colony had its own militia consisting of a small permanent force and volunteers.

It was clear that this created major vulnerabilities to threats from other nations with larger populations and military forces.

The colonies knew a united defence force could better protect Australia.

They called for naval and military forces to be constitutionally enshrined.

An air force was a few years off.

On 1 January 1901 and every day since, the six colonies of Australia, and the people they serve, have benefited from Federation.

In the years following, there were sporadic Premiers' Conferences.

The first being in November 1901.

It was clear these meetings were not suitable for detailed policy discussions.

It was during the First World War that the Conference played a pivotal role.

Delivering agreement on substantially uniform financial and employment support for returned soldiers.

Premiers' Conferences were then largely replaced by meetings between Commonwealth and state ministers after 1929.

Then, as Curtin and Chifley prepared to "win the peace", the first Commonwealth State Housing Agreement was delivered in 1945.

This provided funding for the construction of new dwellings and formed the basis of our modern social housing system.

These specialist meetings evolved again into ministerial councils and forums.

Then the 1970s gave Australia the idea of 'New Federalism'.

Passionately argued by then Opposition Leader E.G. Whitlam in the 1971 Australian Quarterly.

Malcolm Fraser also adopted his own version of "New Federalism".

Come 1990, Bob Hawke instigated a number of Special Premiers Conferences to help deliver his government's microeconomic reforms.

These conferences resulted in COAG, the structure that existed until the pandemic.

The formation of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) in 1992 was described by Prime Minister Keating as:

"quite an historic event" … "it will be a useful forum for debating matters of national moment".

He continued this will ensure:

"that Premiers in all states at the one time are all part of the same conversation and know which way the system is moving"

COAG itself had a number of noteworthy achievements:

COAG also responded rapidly to significant global events to determine a national approach.

In 2005, COAG reconsidered counterterrorism arrangements following transport bombings in London.

In 2009, COAG drove consideration of the Nation Building and Jobs Plan in response to the global financial crisis.

Introduction & Context—Creation o f National Cabinet

National Cabinet was established on 13 March 2020.

Initially in response to the need for enhanced collaboration between the Commonwealth and the states on the COVID-19 pandemic.

National Cabinet's focus has since shifted to progress shared reform and priorities for the nation.

Notable achievements of National Cabinet during this time include:

Housing has also been a particular focus for National Cabinet.

Delivering agreement in August 2023 to an ambitious new national target to build 1.2 million new well-located homes over five years from 1 July 2024.

This is supported by:

National Cabinet must continue to meet the expectations of the Australia people.

To work for Australia.

To address matters quickly, based on advice from experts, with leaders outlining the priorities and parameters for their governments to implement.

All of us must ensure Australia's federal structure continues to deliver intelligent cooperation on issues of strategic national significance.

Overview o f Bill

The COAG Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 seeks to prepare our Federation for the future.

First, the Bill reflects the cessation of COAG.

The Bill will update the COAG Reform Fund Act 2008, renaming the fund as the Federation Reform Fund.

The renaming of the COAG Reform Fund will be reflected in other legislation where it occurs.

Second, the Bill will replace references to 'COAG' with 'First Ministers' Council' where it occurs in legislation.

Inserting a definition which ensures that the decisions of First Ministers will stand no matter the name of the forum.

The First Ministers' Council will mean 'a body (however described) that consists only of, or that includes, the following:

Third, to reflect the establishment of a new architecture for federal-state relations, the Bill seeks to update language around ministerial councils and forums.

Specifically, where relevant acts include the term 'Ministerial Council', the Bill will change the definition to mean a 'body (however described)' that consists of:

For example, references to the 'Standing Council on Health' in the National Health Reform Act2011 would be substituted with 'Ministerial Council'.

Conclusion

The Australian Federation has delivered significant benefit to the Australian people.

It is central to our work for Australia and to delivering policy that improves the lives of all Australians.

Following the cessation of COAG, National Cabinet has been at the forefront of leading these reforms.

Therefore, the COAG Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 is an important step to update outdated references.

This Bill builds on the history of coordination and cooperation which began prior to Federation.

I thank Commonwealth ministers for agreeing to these changes.

I note that following this Bill's passage, states and territories will look to adopt necessary measures through their own legislation.

30 years ago Prime Minister Keating spoke of the "great promise" of continued and consistent intergovernmental relations.

This Bill helps to ensure we keep that promise.

CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (INCORPORATION OF PROPOSALS) BILL (NO. 2) 2023

The Customs Tariff Amendment (Incorporation of Proposals) Bill (No. 2) 2023 will amend the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to incorporate the measures contained in four Customs Tariff Proposals that were moved in the 2023 Winter and Spring parliamentary sittings. The measures relate to the support of space activities, the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup, and extending existing measures that were put in place following the invasion of Ukraine.

The first measure is the expansion in the scope of concessional item 9 of Schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to cover the types of goods specified in the Agreement between the Government of Australia and the European Space Agency for a Co-operative Space Vehicle Tracking Program. The amendment inserts a new paragraph into concessional item 9 to cover goods covered by this Agreement. This will enable the duty-free entry of equipment, materials, supplies and other property that are for the European Space Agency and are for use in Agreed Activities under the agreement and imported by persons employed or engaged by the European Space Agency. This will also enable the duty-free entry of personal and household goods imported by those persons. The European Space Agency is currently undertaking an expansion of their facility in Western Australia to include a new 35 meter diameter deep space antenna for communicating with various space science missions and a Biomass Calibration Transponder to support the 2024 Biomass mission which aims to provide critical information about forests globally and improve our understanding of the role forests play in the carbon cycle. Goods for this project and future projects will be eligible for a 'Free' rate of customs duty where they are imported on or after 1 December 2022.

The second measure extends the duration of the temporary duty reduction for Ukrainian goods for a further twelve months. The amendment replaces paragraph (1)(b) of section 18B of the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to extend the end date for the measure. As a demonstration of Australia's ongoing support for the people of Ukraine who have borne a terrible cost from Russia's invasion, the 'Free' rate of customs duty will continue to apply to goods, other than alcohol, tobacco, petroleum and fuel products, that are the produce or manufacture of Ukraine, to 3 July 2024.

The third measure in this Bill enables certain goods to be imported with a 'Free' rate of customs duty if they are for use in connection with an international sporting event. The amendment inserts new Schedule 4 item 59 into the Customs Tariff Act 1995, which enables the application of concessional treatment where goods are imported from 1 January 2022 and are prescribed by by-law for a specified international sporting event. The first event prescribed was the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup. Co-hosting the FIFA Women's World Cup 2023 was a momentous occasion for Australian sport, and getting to share in the Matildas' inspirational journey has changed the game for women's sport in this country forever. However, the concessional item will have broad application for international sporting events that Australia may host in the future.

The final measure is the extension of the temporary additional duty for Russian and Belarusian goods for a further twenty four months. The amendment for this measure replaces the end date in paragraph (5)(b) of section 18A of the Customs Tariff Act 1995. The additional duty rate of 35 per cent will, therefore, continue to apply to goods that are the produce or manufacture of Russia or Belarus in addition to the general rate of customs duty that applies to these goods. The additional duty applies to goods that are entered for home consumption between 25 April 2022 and 24 October 2025, other than those that are eligible for a schedule 4 concessional item or left for direct shipment to Australia from a place of manufacture or warehouse prior to 25 April 2022.

The measure is a direct response to Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, supported by Belarus. As Russia continues to violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and undermine the rules-based international order, this measure is necessary for Australia's essential security interests. Australia is committed to upholding these principles, which are essential for Australia's international, regional and domestic stability and security. Australia joins like-minded members of the international community in applying this economic measure, which is a necessary part of the response to Russia's and Belarus' flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations.

NATIONAL REDRESS SCHEME FOR INSTITUTIONAL CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AMENDMENT BILL 2023

This Bill will amend the primary legislation for the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse (the Scheme). The amendments form part of the Government's final response to recommendations from the Second Year Review of the National Redress Scheme (the Review) undertaken by Ms Robyn Kruk AO.

The Scheme was established on 1 July 2018 in response to the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. It is just over half way through its legislated ten years of operation and will be reviewed again at the eight year mark, on 1 July 2026.

The implementation of the Scheme was an acknowledgement by the Australian Government and state and territory governments that sexual abuse suffered by children in institutional settings was wrong, a betrayal of trust, and should never have happened.

The Scheme recognises the suffering survivors have experienced and the often life-long impact the abuse has had on their lives. The Scheme accepts that these events occurred and that institutions must take responsibility for this abuse.

The Scheme is an important step towards healing and provides access to three components of redress as a tangible means of recognising the wrongs survivors have suffered. These are a monetary payment, access to counselling and

psychological services and a direct personal response from the institutions responsible, where a survivor wants that to occur.

In preparing this second reading speech, I revisited my remarks on the primary legislation to establish the Scheme. In 2018, I acknowledged the powerful advocates who called for governments to do something to address the wrongs of the past and without whom we would not have those important pieces of legislation. Today, I again acknowledge their bravery in telling their stories to make sure that the abuse they experienced never happens again.

I also wish to acknowledge National Survivors Day, which occurred this week, the 5th Anniversary of the National Apology and that it is just over 11 years since the Royal Commission was announced by the then Prime Minister, the Hon Julia Gillard AC.

As at 10 November 2023, 496 non-government institutions are participating in the Scheme. This means the Scheme now covers approximately 69,000 sites across Australia. In addition, over 13,400 payments totalling approximately $1.2 billion have been paid to survivors to date.

The Government remains committed to encouraging all institutions named in applications to fulfil their moral obligation to join the Scheme. Institutions are able to join the Scheme throughout the life of the Scheme, maximising access to Redress for survivors.

There are also consequences for those institutions who choose not to join the Scheme. These include public naming, restrictions on Commonwealth grant funding and possible loss of their charitable status and associated tax concessions.

The Australian Government remains committed to the continuous improvement of the Scheme by increasing its efficiency, cultural safety and accessibility. With regard to the impact on survivors who are First Nations Australians, culturally and linguistically diverse, those with disability, and those who are terminally ill or ageing is critical in improving the Scheme.

It is essential that the needs of survivors are being met; that the Scheme is operating effectively; and that the unique and evolving challenges in administering a trauma-informed Scheme are being addressed.

In undertaking the Review, survivor voices were front and centre and Ms Kruk consulted extensively with survivors, advocacy groups, support services, institutions and Commonwealth and state and territory governments.

The Review made 38 recommendations to increase access to Redress and improve the Scheme's operation, making it more trauma-informed, efficient and ultimately more survivor-focussed. Of the recommendations, 29 were supported in full, 5 in part and 4 were not supported. This Bill will fulfil the work of the Review and improve the Scheme and the experience of survivors for its remaining life.

A number of the recommendations have already been implemented, including:

This Bill continues this Government's work in improving the Scheme, and gives effect to the remaining changes outlined in the Government's Final Response to the Review, released on 4 May 2023. In line with the Scheme's governance arrangements, all state and territory governments, as partners in the Scheme, have agreed to the amendments in the Bill.

This Bill will improve accessibility to Redress, enhance choices for survivors, increase transparency, and hold the Scheme accountable in delivering its commitment to trauma-informed, survivor-focussed delivery. These outcomes are addressed through progressing the following amendments to the Redress Act:

Reassessment of finalised applications when an institution named later joins the Scheme

Where applicants name an institution that has not joined the Scheme, some may

choose to wait to see if the institution joins the Scheme, while others choose to progress their application. There are currently no avenues to find a non- participating institution liable after a determination is made, when that institution subsequently joins the Scheme.

This Bill introduces a new reassessment process m response to recommendation 3.1 of the Review, making it fairer for survivors who may have been disadvantaged where an institution was not participating at the time their application was progressed.

Where an institution identified in their application later joins the Scheme, or where a government later agrees to be the funder of last resort for the institution, applicants will now have the option of having their application reassessed.

This amendment acknowledges that some survivors have chosen to progress their application without all relevant institutions participating, and seeks to provide an option for these survivors to have their Redress outcome reassessed to include the newly participating institution.

When an institution joins the Scheme, including those that have joined to date, the Scheme will contact applicants where that institution was identified in their application. Where a survivor accepts a reassessed outcome, the institution(s)' liability will be updated to reflect any changes.

Review of determinations

Currently, the Redress Act does not allow applicants to submit further information when requesting a review of a decision. The Second Year Review found this position limits procedural fairness and, along with the risk of a redress offer being reduced, deters survivors from requesting a review.

In response to recommendation 5.1 of the Second Year Review, this measure will allow applicants to provide additional information when requesting a review. The changes will also introduce a 'no worse off provision so that Redress offers are not reduced on review due to a differing interpretation by the reviewing Independent Decision Maker.

To protect Scheme integrity, reviewed decisions can still be adjusted to account for new information that was not available at the time of the original decision. This could include a previously undeclared prior payment; in this example, the final redress amount may be reduced on review. The 'no worse off provision is also limited to remain consistent with the principles of the Scheme and account for fraud and misleading information supplied.

Eligibility for people with serious criminal convictions

Currently, applicants who are sentenced to imprisonment for five years or longer for a single offence (defined as a Serious Criminal Conviction) are not entitled to redress unless the Operator is satisfied that providing redress to the applicant will not bring the Scheme into disrepute or adversely affect public confidence in, or support for, the Scheme.

For the Scheme Operator to make this determination, applicants with a Serious Criminal Conviction are required to undergo a special assessment process. This process includes seeking advice from the Attorneys General in the jurisdiction(s) where the offence(s) and child sexual abuse occurred. The special assessment process has resulted in delays for this group of applicants.

In_response to recommendation 3.2 of the Review, this Bill limits the special assessment process to specific classes of serious offences. This will reduce the circumstances where applicants are required to go through the special assessment process.

To achieve this, only applicants who are sentenced to imprisonment for five years or more for unlawful killing, sexual offences, or terrorism offences, or where a risk to the integrity of the Scheme exists, will be required to undergo the special assessment process.

Eligibility for prisoners

A survivor who is currently incarcerated cannot make an application to the Scheme, unless there are exceptional circumstances justifying the application being made. For example, where the survivor will not be released before the Scheme ends on 30 June 2028, or is so ill that they cannot make an application for redress upon their release from gaol.

In response to recommendation 3.2 of the Review, this Bill removes the restriction on incarcerated survivors from making an application to the Scheme. Practically, this means all incarcerated survivors will be able to access redress where they meet the eligibility requirements and those applying from gaol will no longer need to submit an applying from gaol form, or supply the Scheme with information outlining exceptional circumstances.

This will remove a significant barrier for incarcerated survivors in applying for redress and will provide greater accessibility to the Scheme for a cohort of survivors where there is an acknowledged impact of institutional child sexual abuse.

Amendments to the protected information provisions

The Scheme receives and holds very sensitive information about people, and the protected information framework is designed so that this information is handled in a manner that reflects this.

The Second Year Review recommendation 3.14 suggested the scope and content of the protected information provisions be reviewed, with specific regard to the protection of information provided by applicants and the permitted use by the Scheme Operator and institutions of that information.

A review of the protected information framework found that overall the current provisions are appropriate and required for the operation of the Scheme and protection of children; but it identified some measures to improve the framework which are included in this Bill.

The changes will enable the Scheme Operator to disclose:

This amendment is designed to improve transparency with survivors on the steps taken by the institution they named in their application to join the Scheme.

This measure will also allow a person engaged by a participating institution to disclose protected information to another institution within the same participating group for the purpose of an internal investigation and disciplinary procedures.

Funder of last resort

In response to the Review, the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment (Funders of last Resort and Other Measures) Act 2021 (the 2021 FOLR Act) extended the Funder of Last Resort (FOLR) arrangements in the Redress Act.

This extended the provisions to encompass non-defunct institutions that are unable to participate in the Scheme, and defunct institutions with which participating jurisdictions do not share responsibility for abuse and there is no parent institution to take responsibility.

This Bill would make technical amendments to the FOLR provisions to ensure where a payment is made under the Redress Act and the 2021 FOLR Act, final figures for invoicing are appropriately rounded up to the nearest cent. Additionally, this Bill would make technical amendments to ensure a FOLR's redress liability is not double counted in limited scenarios when applying the provisions of both the Redress Act and the 2021 FOLR Act.

Summary

To conclude, this Bill introduces the remaining legislative amendments arising from the Australian Government's Final Response to the Second Year Review and includes additional improvements to the operation of the Scheme.

Considering the compounding impact for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse is at the forefront of all the Scheme does; it guides policy, legislation and how redress is delivered to survivors.

This Bill is representative of this government's commitment to uphold the trauma-informed principles that guide the Scheme. The legislative changes have been made in consultation with states and territories as our partners in the Scheme.

The Government is pleased to outline these important and substantial amendments and looks forward to continuing to improve the Scheme for the benefit of survivors.

PAID PARENTAL LEAVE AMENDMENT (MORE SUPPORT FOR WORKING FAMILIES) BILL 2023

Labor has a long and proud history of improving the lives of Australian families with critical, nation-building reforms.

It was Labor governments who created Medicare, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Labor governments introduced no fault divorce, the single mothers benefit and the child support system. And it was a Labor government—the Gillard Government—that introduced Paid Parental Leave in this country.

When Paid Parental Leave was introduced in 2011, it was a major milestone for Australian families. As the Minister for Families, the Honourable Jenny Macklin MP, said in Parliament at the time: "This historic reform is a major win for working families who have been waiting decades for a national paid parental leave scheme".

For many parents, the 18-week payment—fully funded by the Government—was the first time they could access any paid parental leave.

This was a material advancement in workplace and economic equality for women, whose disproportionate share of unpaid care has long-term consequences for their economic security.

Paid Parental Leave is critical for families, it is critical for women and it is critical for the economy. The Albanese Government knows this.

We know paid parental leave is vital for the health and wellbeing of parents and their children. We know investing in paid parental leave benefits our economy. And we know that paid parental leave can advance gender equality.

We heard these messages loud and clear at our successful Jobs and Skills Summit, where gender equality and economic reform went hand in hand. Businesses, unions, experts and economists all understand that one of the best ways to boost productivity and participation is to provide more choice and more support for families—and, importantly, more opportunity for women.

That is why Paid Parental Leave reform was a centrepiece of our first Budget. As the Prime Minister said at the time: "a parental leave system that empowers the full and equal participation of women will be good for business, good for families and good for our economy."

Earlier this year, our Government implemented legislation to modernise the system to reflect how Australian families and their needs have evolved over the last decade. Our changes, which commenced on 1 July, give more families access to the payment, give parents more flexibility in how they take leave, and encourage them to share care.

These important structural changes laid a strong foundation for our expansion to 26 weeks, which is the focus of this Bill.

The Paid Parental Leave Amendment (More Support for Working Families) Bill 2023 increases the scheme to six months by 2026. It implements in full our commitment from the 2022-23 October Budget and represents a total

investment of $1.2 billion over five years.

It is a privilege to stand in this chamber and introduce a bill that delivers the largest expansion of Paid Parental Leave in its history. It provides families an extra six weeks of Government-paid leave, increasing the overall length of the scheme to six months by 2026. As a result of these reforms, from 2026-27 the Government's total investment in PPL will be around $4.4 billion a year.

This significant investment reflects our Government's commitment to deliver better outcomes for families and advance economic equality for women.

The roughly 180,000 families who receive the payment each year will benefit from a more generous scheme that supports maternal health and wellbeing, encourages both parents to take leave, and gives families flexibility to choose how they share care.

Not only will this help families better balance work and care, it will also support participation and productivity over the longer term, providing a dividend for the Australian economy.

I am pleased that our reform has been widely welcomed by family and gender advocates, employer and unions groups, including:

Currently, a working family can access up to 20 weeks of Government-funded Paid Parental Leave. To encourage shared care, two weeks are reserved for each parents on a 'use it or lose it' basis, leaving 16 weeks for parents to share however they choose.

Starting on 1 July 2024, this Bill expands the scheme by two weeks each year until reaching 26 weeks—a full six months—in 2026.

By 1 July 2026, the scheme will be 26 weeks long, with four weeks reserved for each parent on a 'use it or lose it' basis. That leaves 18 weeks that parents can choose to share however they wish. For instance, a couple may decide to share leave equally and take 13 weeks each.

Meanwhile single parents will have access to the full 26-week entitlement.

Coupled parents will also be able to take up to four weeks of PPL at the same time. Currently, parents may take up to two weeks together. Enabling parents to take parental leave together has positive effects for maternal recovery.

It provides the birth parent with extra support as they recover and is shown to reduce parenting stress.

I would like to thank the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce, chaired by Sam Mostyn AO, who provided advice to the Government on the optimal model of the 26-week scheme. The settings in the Bill reflect the advice from the Taskforce.

The Bill's carefully designed changes all work together to strike an important balance of increasing support to families, encouraging both parents to take leave, and providing flexibility in how they structure their care arrangements.

Supporting maternal health and recovery from childbirth is an important objective of Paid Parental Leave. The Bill strengthens this objective by extending the length of the scheme, which has long-term health and wellbeing benefits for children and their parents.

Another key objective of the scheme is encouraging fathers and partners to take leave, which in turn helps balance work and family life, and promotes gender equality.

International evidence is clear that when fathers take a more active role in looking after their children and participate in home life, mothers feel more supported to return to work. That's great for the family and for the economy.

Often both parents want to take some time off work to be with their child after birth. Nevertheless, we know not all secondary caregivers feel confident to take parental leave. Research shows that periods of leave set aside for partners, and not transferrable to the birth parent, encourages secondary caregivers to take leave. It helps to normalise fathers' use of parental leave and signals that parenting is a shared, equal partnership.

When fathers take a greater caring role from the start, evidence shows there is a more even distribution of household responsibilities, which persists throughout the child's life.

The changes in this Bill sends a clear message that the Government supports shared care, and we want to see that reinforced in workplaces and our communities.

Helping both parents balance caring responsibilities has significant benefits for families, businesses, the economy and gender equality. Government provides critical support through the tax-payer funded paid parental leave scheme, but employers also have a key role to play.

The Government payment is a minimum entitlement designed to complement employer-provided leave.

Data collected by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency shows the proportion of businesses providing their own paid parental leave has increased over the last decade. In 2021-22, 62 per cent of reporting employers offered employer- funded paid parental leave, up from 48 per cent in 2013-14.

This positive trend demonstrates employers increasingly see themselves as having a role alongside the Government in providing paid parental leave. We want to see this keep growing. We want paid parental leave to continue to be recognised and celebrated as not only great social policy, but also a valuable workplace investment that returns benefits for parents, employers, and the economy.

In summary, it is critical that our Paid Parental Leave scheme supports modem Australian families—a scheme that is flexible, fair and drives positive health, social and economic outcomes for both parents and their children.

This Bill does just that. Crucially, it gives more families access to the Government payment, provides parents more flexibility in how they take leave, and encourages them to share care to support gender equality.

Paid Parental Leave is a proud Labor legacy and we will always work to strengthen it.

This Bill is good for parents, good for children, good for employers and good for the economy.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate adjourned.

Ordered that the bills be listed on the Notice Paper as separate orders of the day.