Tony Burke
Watson · Australian Labor Party · Australia
“People smugglers want there to be footage of Australian voices claiming that people smuggling will work, and those opposite are providing it. The second thing that people smugglers want is access to information.”
“I think it's fair to say that that sort of respect is ordinarily there regardless—it's nothing to do with the gravity of the issue. It's just an acknowledgement that each of us is one out of 150, to make sure that we are conscious that, if everybody acted the way we might want to act in a particular moment, the House could itself become u…”
“on indulgence—When the government seeks to have a debate management motion, there's always discussion in the House as to whether or not that is reasonable. In order for us to make sure that we can respect all 150 members of the parliament, there are a number of things that members ordinarily do.”
“Let me start with this: anyone who saw last night on the news that a number of people had tried to enter our country without a visa should know that, by the time they woke up this morning, every single one of them had been removed from Australia—every single one.”
“I thank the member for Leichhardt. I acknowledge the strong role that the member for Leichhardt has had in combating foreign fishing and, in particular, in calling for the work of Border Force that's up there now in Operation BROADSTAFF.”
“This is an amendment about who the deputy chair should be and whether they should be a member of the opposition. The deputy chair of the committee is a member of the opposition; it's Senator Dean Smith.”
The complete record
Every one of 659 lines we hold for Tony Burke, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 14.
“We've said that soon we'll be making draft standards available for matters of national environmental significance and for offsets as well as the First Nations engagement standard. Data and compliance would come next. None of these standards actually have force until they have legislation to bounce off and to launch from. The Samuel review recommended other standards, including a community consultation standard. I know the minister is looking into it, and my understanding is that the minister has spoken directly to the member for Indi about community consultation standards as well. But, as I say, to be clear, we can't actually make any standards until the bill has become law. This is where we have had a long time with the Samuel report not becoming law.”
“I thank the member for Indi both for raising the legislation and for following what has been a theme for the member for Indi in her entire time in this place, which is community consultation and involving the community in decision-making. The environment legislation that's before the chamber is aimed quite squarely at being able to deliver better outcomes for the environment and also a faster decision-making process. As part of that, as people know, it's based closely on the Samuel report. The Samuel report noted that the act, as it's currently portrayed, doesn't have clear standards or clear benchmarks. One of the areas that Graeme Samuel referred to in terms of where these benchmarks and standards could be established is with respect to community consultation. It's raised directly there.”
“So we actually have a situation right now where those opposite are taking up 25 minutes of the House's time, the House where they say the debate should happen, to have a debate about bringing a debate here where there are no additional speakers who have put their names forward at all, not one. Forty-eight people put themselves forward for a piece of legislation, so we scheduled the debate for here. No-one other than the shadow minister put their name forward for the freedom-of-information legislation, and they're wanting to have us vote on where no-one should speak. That's what this vote is about. We've just had their speeches, and we're now going to have to bring everybody in here to vote on where the bill with no-one listed to speak should be debated, because that's the issue with transparency. That's what's in front of us right now.”
“When we're prioritising which legislation goes here and which goes to the Federation Chamber, I think it's completely significant that a bill that 48 members of parliament have indicated that they want to speak on—a lot are those opposite; more are on the government side, but still I think it's in the order of 18 or something opposition members—be debated in the main chamber. That matters. Regarding the bill that they've just spoken about, the shadow minister always speaks in the chamber, so the speech from the shadow minister was in the chamber, and that was part of the declaration I've already made. Guess how many people have put their names on the list to speak on freedom of information other than the first speaker? Zero.”
“I hope those opposite would never describe legislation like their own private member's bill, given the topic area, or state sponsors of terrorism or hate crimes legislation in that way. Significant legislation goes there all the time. What we always look at when we're working out where different pieces of legislation should go is the speaking list, because the speaking list gives an indication of how many members are likely to want to be able to speak. I've got a copy of the speakers list. The environment legislation has been all through the media. It's very important legislation. I introduced it last Thursday. The debate will begin with the relevant shadow minister making a speech, and then the debate will go on. How many people have put their names down to speak on the environment legislation? 48.”
“But the press gallery is able to monitor this in the exact same way as the press gallery is able to monitor the Federation Chamber, because they're both televised and they're both online. They're both available. They're filmed constantly. But I can tell you that the argument about why we send certain bills to the Federation Chamber has been raised, and I'm surprised that it's being claimed that this is where you send legislation that you don't want anyone to see. Last Tuesday, those opposite moved that their own private member's bill on mandatory minimum sentences be brought on for debate, and guess where they said they wanted it to be debated? The Federation Chamber, the room without a skylight—that's where they wanted their own private member's bill to be debated. We've often had various debates go up there.”
“I do appreciate the gift of a procedural debate today. So, thank you to the Manager of Opposition Business for bringing it on. I'd remind the seconder of the motion that the clocks that count down refer to a time limit, not a time target. When you run out of material and you're left to talk about where the skylights in the building are, you're always allowed to sit down before the clock gets to zero. The option is always available to you. It is important to explain for the Hansard that, when the Manager of Opposition Business was referring to the fact that the media can come into this room and have the scrutiny of physically being in this room, he gestured to a gallery—which Hansard will not record unless I refer to it now—that actually has nobody in it from the press gallery at this point in time.”
“I declare that, unless otherwise ordered, the Customs Tariff Amendment (Geelong Treaty Implementation) Bill 2025 and the Freedom of Information Amendment Bill 2025 stand referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of each bill.”
“I will also just let members know—because a few members, particularly the Manager of Opposition Business, have been asking—where we're up to with the calendar for next year. I advise we won't have that finalised until the final week of sittings, but people should work on the basis that we're expecting to return on 3 February; that's the week we expect to return.”
“If I can explain the arrangements for today: I've got a declaration to refer matters to the Federation Chamber and a suspension motion that I'll be moving shortly. I ask that we don't deal with that immediately, that we deal with that later in the day. In advising that, let me first of all say there will certainly be a late-night sitting tonight. Whether it is a late-night sitting in this House only or whether it is a late-night sitting in the Federation Chamber and this House is something that the government will look at; we will look at speaking lists and make a decision later in the day. I think there is no better way to celebrate my birthday than the parliament sitting as long as possible today! We'll move that resolution later today but not immediately.”
“The methods that we've used previously for other forms of Australian content don't match with the streaming services. For example, what we do on free-to-air TV, where you have particular times of day and guarantees, don't work when you're dealing with an on-demand service. Similarly, the guaranteed funding that happens to SBS or the ABC doesn't work for a commercial streaming service. So the methods have to be different, and that means we need to work through a series of different trade obligations. But, in doing so, the government's objective, which we've previously stated, remains completely on foot, and we hope to continue to be able to report more to the House.”
“Thanks to the Prime Minister. The policy of the government hasn't changed. The principle that we're working towards is really simple. If you pick up your remote control at home, and you go to the ABC or SBS, you're guaranteed Australian content. If you go to the commercial TV stations, there's still some level of Australian content guaranteed. If you go to Foxtel, there's still Australian content. Yet, if you're sitting there with the same remote control, flicking to any of the streaming services, there's currently no guarantee of Australian content. This is something where people are aware of some of the different negotiations that the government has been doing, but, effectively, the objective is simple: no matter which remote control you're holding, Australian content should be at your fingertips.”
“The environment needs the response to be made. Business needs the response to be made. Let's get this done. Debate adjourned.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 would provide a framework to impose charges in relation to prescribed matters connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The specific activities for which charges will be imposed, and the amount of such charges, will be set out in the regulations. The charges imposed under these bills will be limited to those charges (and amounts of charges) necessary for cost recovery purposes. Any arrangements will be consulted on prior to their imposition. In commending this bill to the House, I commend the entire package of bills to the House. This report has been waiting for a response for a good five years.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 would provide a framework to impose charges in relation to prescribed matters connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The specific activities for which charges will be imposed, and the amount of such charges, will be set out in the regulations. The charges imposed under these bills will be limited to those charges (and amounts of charges) necessary for cost recovery purposes. Any arrangements will be consulted on prior to their imposition. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 would provide a framework to impose charges in relation to prescribed matters connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The specific activities for which charges will be imposed, and the amount of such charges, will be set out in the regulations. The charges imposed under these bills will be limited to those charges (and amounts of charges) necessary for cost recovery purposes. Any arrangements will be consulted on prior to their imposition. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025 (the restoration charge imposition bill) would impose the following charges relevant to actions taken under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999: These charges relate to amendments to the EPBC Act proposed by the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025. Any arrangements will be consulted on prior to their imposition. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned.”
“Providing better, more readily available and useable data and reporting on the environment, its condition and the location of our nationally significant plants and animals would underpin more streamlined and informed environmental decisions that reduce negative impacts, and increase positive impacts, on nature. This will restore transparency and confidence in environmental information and decision-making. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned.”
“The Environment Information Australia Bill 2025 (the EIA Bill) would establish the statutory position of the Head of Environment Information Australia (HEIA), to provide national leadership for improving the availability and accessibility of high-quality, national environmental data and information, and ensuring that there is independent reporting and accountability for the state of the environment and our effectiveness in protecting and restoring it. Access to authoritative sources of high-quality environmental information is crucial for evidence-informed and targeted policy, project, investment and regulatory decision-making.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The 2020 independent review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, led by Professor Graeme Samuel AC, found that Australia's environment data and information is fragmented and disparate, and that there are fundamental information gaps. Unlocking impediments to data sharing and supply is a key component of Australia's environmental law reforms to enable better, faster decisions by government and business while protecting areas of high environmental value.”
“The amendments will deliver stronger protections and restoration for the environment, more efficient and robust project assessments to support our economy, and greater accountability and trust in decision-making. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025 would establish a statutory Commonwealth entity known as the National Environmental Protection Agency (National EPA). An independent environmental regulator is central to an Australia which is focused on environmental protection and the restoration of public accountability and trust. The National EPA would be Australia's first national, independent environmental protection agency with strong new powers and penalties to better protect and restore Australia's unique environment. The National EPA Bill accompanies a suite of amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).”
“That is the priority of the Albanese government, and our door is open to make it happen. Every day we delay is a day our environment is degrading further. And every day we delay is one we could be building the renewable energy and the housing we need for the future. I commend this bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned.”
“We've been down this path before—under governments of both sides—and we cannot afford to wait any longer. This bill is the product of work over many years by countless people, all of whom I know are keen to see this done. It's a bill that clearly responds to the Samuel review and balances the need for stronger environmental protections with the imperative to ensure Australia's prosperity and deliver the critical projects we need. It would deliver on the expectations of Australians for a system that is faster, fairer and fit for the future. And now everyone who has the privilege of representing their community or their state or territory has the opportunity to be part of the solution. We can get this done to deliver on what the Australian people put us here to do.”
“This includes streamlining wildlife trade laws to align with international standards, making permits more flexible and processes more efficient and making changes to reduce the need for separate approvals of offshore petroleum projects where regulations meet national standards, reflecting current practice under the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority strategic assessment. The bill would also refine the scope of the nuclear trigger to focus on radiological exposure, which will avoid unnecessary referrals for critical minerals projects which are encountering trace elements of radioactive material, while maintaining strict oversight of uranium and nuclear facilities. Conclusion This package of bills is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reform our environmental laws.”
“These changes support a new robust offsets regime. This contributes to simplified and streamlined environmental assessment processes, reducing uncertainty and delay for proponents. This bill is one of four imposition bills that would establish a charging framework and provide for potential future appropriate cost recovery arrangements for environmental matters under the EPBC Act, subject to the decision of government. Administrative fixes Finally, the Environment Protection Reform Bill introduces a range of administrative fixes to address duplicative or inefficient processes in the legislation.”
“This will improve transparency and accountability for new developments under the act and support the effective operation of the safeguard mechanism, without duplicating it. First Nations engagement in decision - making The reforms codify the involvement of First Nations people in environmental governance and decision-making through the Indigenous advisory committee. The reforms also create statutory advisory functions for the committee in the development of national environmental standards and in species listings and conservation planning. Charges The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025 provides a legislative framework for cost recovery arrangements of restoration contributions to support project approvals, bioregional planning and national interest approvals and exemptions.”
“This is a new statutory position within the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, with a mandate to provide environmental data and information to the National EPA, to the minister, and to the public. The head of the EIA will be tasked with transparently reporting on trends in the environment, collecting information and producing consistent tracking of the state of Australia's environment. Better data means better, faster decisions by government and business while protecting areas of high environmental value. Emissions disclosure The Environment Protection Reform Bill requires proponents to disclose estimates for scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions as part of the information requirements for a controlled action.”
“The National EPA will also provide guidance and education to both businesses and the public, in order to raise awareness and proactively support compliance with environmental laws. The EPA will also have an important role to play in ensuring compliance with the national standards through bilateral agreements, providing advice to the minister about how accredited arrangements are complying with the national standards, with the minister ultimately responsible for signing off on accreditations. There's also Environment Information Australia. EIA Currently, we know that national environmental information is fragmented. It's inconsistent in quality, and it's difficult to access and it's difficult to use. To solve this problem, the Environment Information Australia Bill 2025 would establish the Head of Environment Information Australia.”
“Under current laws, decision-making on EPBC Act environmental assessments and approvals is the responsibility of the minister, who is democratically accountable. This will not change. The National EPA will also have a wholly independent role as a regulator of compliance and enforcement under the EPBC Act. They will have access to stronger new powers, such as new environment protection orders, and will be tasked with holding serious environmental rule breakers to account for the environmental harm they have caused. Integrated regulatory functions, spanning compliance, enforcement, assessment, monitoring and auditing, would deliver a more consistent and effective approach for stakeholders and the regulated community.”
“I want to take the opportunity here, as well as acknowledging the minister, to acknowledge Labor Party members, particularly the Labor Environment Action Network, who have advocated so strongly for this reform for many years. The establishment of the EPA will be a true Labor legacy—and I indicate thanks to those involved in that campaign over such a long time. The National EPA will be Australia's first national, independent environmental protection agency. As a national environmental regulator, the National EPA would not duplicate the role of state and territory EPAs. By establishing a National EPA, we are creating a transparent, accountable, and unified regulator to oversee environmental protections. The development of a National EPA model has been informed by extensive—indeed, years—of engagement with stakeholders.”
“Pillar 3: greater accountability and transparency in decision - making Finally, these reforms deliver on this third pillar of the government's environmental law reform agenda: as I said, greater accountability and transparency in environmental decision-making. This brings us to the Environmental Protection Agency. EPA A cornerstone of this third pillar is the establishment of an independent National Environmental Protection Agency, through the subsequent bill I will introduce, the National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025. This has been a Labor commitment at the last two elections, endorsed by the Australian people, and will be delivered through this bill. This is a landmark step in restoring transparency and effectiveness in environmental governance.”
“The reforms would also make the current national interest exemption a more responsive mechanism, particularly in emergency situations, like where roads need to be made safe following natural disasters. Reconsiderations changes This bill package also addresses out-of-date reconsideration provisions—balancing environmental protection with certainty for industry. These changes will include imposing a 28-day time limit for third parties to request a reconsideration of a controlled action decision, while the action is under assessment, aligned with timelines and other administrative review provisions in the act and increasing certainty for business.”
“Rulings will clarify how laws, regulations or subordinate instruments apply in specific circumstances and would be made publicly available so that assessments are predictable, and everyone has visibility of how the law will be applied. National interest pathways A new national interest approval pathway would also be included in the act to allow critical projects to proceed in the national interest under strict transparency conditions, even if they do not meet all environmental standards—responding to a recommendation in the Samuel Review. It is designed to be used rarely, where projects are demonstrably in the national interest and require the Minister to publish a statement of reasons in support of the decision.”
“Streamlined assessment pathways The reforms create faster and clearer environmental assessments through a new streamlined pathway for proponents who provide sufficient upfront information and design their proposals in line with the environmental and other requirements of this bill. It rationalises three existing pathways and is responsive to a recommendation of the Samuel Review. The new pathway would reduce assessment and approval timeframes by 20 days, cutting the current 70-day statutory period to 50 days or less. Analysis has shown that faster approvals through this pathway are estimated to save over half a billion dollars across the economy, and potentially as much as $7 billion. Rulings The bill introduces a new power for ministerial rulings, assisting in the interpretation and clarity of decision making under the act.”
“By doing the work upfront to map areas of higher and lower biodiversity we can give certainty to industry and the community about where development can occur, while protecting areas of high environmental value. This means that projects covered by a bioregional plan development zone will simply register to comply with the bioregional plan without needing to seek project level approval under the act. Bioregional plans will, at the same time, give clear signals about where development is inappropriate with conservation zones where certain activities can't be undertaken. Strategic assessments will also be made more flexible and efficient, better enabling state or territory governments or a partner to gain a strategic assessment approval.”
“Ultimately, we want states and territories to be able to work with us towards less duplicative assessments, and ultimately, approvals while meeting our environmental standards. Landscape scale approaches In addition to increasing the efficiency of project-by-project approvals, we are focused on delivering proper landscape-scale approaches to environmental restoration and approvals. Close cooperation between the Commonwealth, states and territories is critical to aligning regulatory systems and implementing these important national reforms. These reforms provide the potential for us to plan together, at a landscape scale, delivering better environmental outcomes and more certainty for proponents. Bioregional planning provisions will also be improved to unlock better government led planning and facilitate faster approvals.”
“Accreditatio n Central to the Samuel Review were recommendations around reducing duplication between state and territory processes and Commonwealth processes. While the act currently enables assessments and approvals under the EPBC Act to be undertaken by states and territories under bilateral agreements, these agreements are inflexible, unresponsive and easily broken over time. The bill package seeks to improve the operation of bilateral agreements with states and territories, making the framework more responsive to change and more durable in the long term. The changes will also ensure that state and territory processes accredited under bilateral agreements meet national environmental standards and have ongoing assurance mechanisms to ensure that environmental protection requirements are being met.”
“This framework will allow proponents to meet their obligations by either delivering their own offsets or by an upfront payment into a government restoration fund, or both. The new Restoration Contributions Holder will be able to use the funds to strategically deliver offsets to have greater environmental benefits, including through pooling funds for similar impacts. This approach is better for the environment and better for business. Pillar 2: more efficient and robust decision-making This bill package recognises that a more efficient regulatory system is also needed to enable better, faster decisions. We have heard loud and clear that assessments under the EPBC Act are unpredictable, take too long, and that the impacts of long approval timeframes are being felt across the economy. These reforms address this challenge head on.”
“'Net gain' This bill ensures that projects must leave the environment better off by introducing the concept of 'net gain' for environmental offsets, a shift from the current rules threshold which is 'no net loss'. This is also a clear principle from the Samuel review. Impacts to protected matters would need to be avoided and minimised, with residual significant impacts offset to leave the environment in a better state than what was there in the absence of a project. This will shift the dial towards avoided impacts and restoration and give our natural environment the opportunity to regenerate, recover and become more resilient. To support the shift in the offsets framework and deliver time savings for proponents, a new restoration contribution framework will be introduced.”
“This results in strengthened protections for threatened species as well as more efficient decisions, meaning better environmental outcomes and faster assessments. Stronger powers and penalties The Samuel review recognised that for some bad actors, breaching the law is just the cost of doing business. This bill package introduces tougher penalties and new compliance and enforcement powers to deter breaches and respond swiftly to serious environmental harm. While we know that most proponents follow the law, we need modern, fit-for-purpose tools to respond to the most serious breaches. The way to avoid these penalties is simple—follow the law, refer for assessment when appropriate and abide by the conditions of your approval, because once some things are gone, they are gone for good.”
“This was identified in the Samuel review which found that 'strong protections are needed for those matters most at risk of being lost, including clear rules about unacceptable impacts'. This bill sets clear, upfront criteria for what constitutes an unacceptable impact to give clarity and certainty to business, while safeguarding our most precious natural assets. It is designed to set a responsible standard, used in very limited circumstances, to protect those nationally protected matters that cannot ever be replaced. Protection statements A new ability to make protection statements will reduce ambiguity around what a decision-maker must consider during the approval of actions in protecting threatened species, providing greater clarity for proponents.”
“Priority standards include those for matters of national environmental standards and offsets, with other standards, including for first nations engagement and data and information, to follow. Draft priority standards will soon be available for consultation so that there is clarity on the direction of new protections before the passage of this legislation. To ensure protections are not eroded over time, the standards framework includes a 'no regression' clause, meaning that standards cannot be changed or updated unless the new standard would deliver equivalent or improved environmental outcomes. Unacceptable impacts The EPBC Act currently includes a 'clearly unacceptable' category for decisions at the referral stage, however, the term unacceptable is undefined.”
“It found that 'Australia's natural environment and iconic places are in an overall state of decline and are under increasing threat.' There are a number of key new measures in these bills. E nvironmental s tandards This bill will deliver a new framework for national environmental standards, which would allow clear standards for critical environmental protection measures to be set out in regulations—this was the centrepiece of the Samuel review. Standards are aimed at delivering both improved environmental outcomes and better certainty for businesses through setting clear and enforceable expectations. The bill establishes the ministerial power to make national environmental standards which will be made in similar ways to other regulations.”
“Firstly, there is stronger environmental protection and restoration—to not just look after our special places, but to restore and regenerate them for future generations. Secondly, there is more efficient and robust project assessments and approvals, delivering a system which can better respond to big national priorities like the renewable energy transition, a future made in Australia and the housing that we need. And finally, there is greater accountability and transparency in decision-making, so that all Australians can have confidence in these laws, including delivering our election commitment for Australia's National Environment Protection Agency. Pillar 1: stronger environmental protection and restoration. The Samuel review clearly articulated the necessity of better protecting the environment.”
“I acknowledge the presence in the chamber of Australia's Minister for the Environment, Senator Murray Watt. His work has made sure that we now have before us a package of bills that will finally deliver the reforms to our environment laws that Australians have long demanded. Our a pproach Five years ago today the Samuel review was handed down to the then coalition government, outlining a blueprint for reform. It provided a clear set of recommendations to fundamentally reform the way that environment impacts and approvals are managed in this country. This package of bills remains faithful to our commitment to follow the spirit of the Samuel review in reforming this legislation. In crafting these reforms we have looked to three key pillars.”
“That was the clear assessment delivered by Professor Graeme Samuel when he handed down his independent review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), a review that was delivered five years ago today to the then minister for the environment and now opposition leader. And five years later where are we? With laws that are enabling the decline of our precious natural environment—the iconic creatures and beautiful places that are fundamental to the Australian character. They are also not facilitating the important projects we need—the housing, renewable energy, critical minerals we need for Australia's economic future. This government has listened and the message is clear: we need change. The law is broken. We have to fix it. That's the challenge for everyone in this place now.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Labor is the party of the environment. It's Labor that has delivered every single major environment reform in Australia's history—Landcare, saving the Franklin, protecting the Daintree and Kakadu, building the largest network of marine parks in the world and meaningfully addressing the threat of climate change. And now it's Labor that wants to reform our national environment laws to ensure that we are protecting nature for generations to come. The truth is our environment laws are broken. They're not working for the environment, business, the economy or for the community.”
“These documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings . Documents made parliamentary papers.”
“He tells them to only talk about themselves, to focus on division and to let the Albanese Labor government do the delivery.”