Julian Hill
Bruce · Australian Labor Party · Australia
“We want people to aspire to home ownership and to get into the housing market, and yet for the past 20 years it has felt like, however fast they save on the treadmill, house prices just race ahead twice as fast—and that's what the data shows. The opposition's policy depends on who you ask.”
“For those listening at home, Narrabundah is a pretty wealthy suburb in Canberra. He was standing in front of a flat this morning that, in 2006, sold for $420,000. The asking price today is $900,000. He thinks that's not a problem. He thinks nothing needs to change.”
“One of the things that we've been hearing over the last couple of weeks, out in the community—I was at the Berwick market on Sunday morning; around Dandenong at lunchtime—is the question of house prices. What's going to happen with house prices with the government's tax changes? I want to make a couple of points.”
“The definition of insanity, of course, is doing the same thing and expecting a different result, which is what we see from the Liberal Party. Actually, I'm going to contradict myself; I'll finish on this point. They do have one policy for housing: super for housing.”
“Seven out of 10 for performance art. There were a few questions I was actually looking forward to responding to, but unfortunately the opposition chose to call a bunch of silly divisions and has eaten into the time, so we've run out of time. Proposed expenditure agreed to.”
“The truth is, from when the government was elected four years ago, debt is in a better place. It's lower, deficits are lower and the debt-to-GDP ratio is lower. The fact is—and you can see it in the budget papers in black and white—the budget is in far, far better shape than the mess that the Liberals left behind.”
The complete record
Every one of 313 lines we hold for Julian Hill, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 7.
“The minister will also be required to specify in a legislative instrument who has to pay the charges, and the amount of each charge. This provides flexibility to impose different charges for different classes of persons, such as reduced charges for volunteers. The National Policing Information Committee, to be established under the ACIC Bill 2026, will be required to make recommendations to the minister about the charge amounts. Closing remarks This bill is key to the implementation of recommendations of the independent review. The ACIC's provision of nationally coordinated criminal history check services is critical to provide a national view of a person's previous convictions for criminal offences. These services help protect the Australian community.”
“They are used for a variety of purposes, including employment screening, working with children and vulnerable persons, and various licensing and registration schemes. Amounts received through these charges will continue to be used to support the delivery of effective national policing information systems and services. The bill will create a mechanism to allow the minister to specify in a legislative instrument the kinds of nationally coordinated criminal history check services that the ACIC will charge for. This will ensure there is flexibility in the legislation to support charging models for different services. For example, while nationally coordinated criminal history checks are currently provided point-in-time, in future this may be extended to continuous checking services.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill forms a package with the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission Bill 2026, which implements recommendations of the Independent review of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and associated Commonwealth law enforcement arrangements (Independent Review), in particular the replacement of the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002. In line with recommendations from the independent review, this bill will allow the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission to continue to impose charges for nationally coordinated criminal history check services. Nationally coordinated criminal history check services provide a complete national view of a person's convictions for criminal offences.”
“Closing remarks The measures I've outlined in this bill deliver fundamental reforms to recast the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission as Australia's national criminal intelligence agency focused on countering serious and organised crime. This bill reflects this government's commitment to protecting the Australian community, by ensuring that our agencies can adapt and respond to the rapidly evolving landscape of serious and organised crime. I commend the bill. Debate adjourned.”
“Part 10 of the bill contains record-keeping and reporting requirements to facilitate effective and appropriate oversight of the ACIC and its use of powers by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. This will complement other legislation facilitating oversight of the ACIC as amended by the Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Act 2025. This part of the bill will include a requirement for periodic independent reviews to ensure the legislation remains fit for purpose. This bill will be accompanied by the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (National Policing Information Charges) Bill 2026 and a consequential and transitional package of amendments, to be introduced later this year.”
“This is in recognition that sharing intelligence with other agencies and bodies will support broader efforts to mitigate risks, address vulnerabilities and harden the environment against serious and organised crime. This part will also establish secrecy offences to ensure there are adequate protections over the sensitive information that the ACIC holds. Part 9 of the bill contains administrative provisions to support staffing and appointments. The bill will provide for the appointment of the director-general of the ACIC and appointment of independent examiners. The director-general will have powers in relation to staffing and the general administration and operation of the agency.”
“Part 7 of the bill will continue to enable the ACIC to make and give criminal intelligence assessments to inform certain background checks, including to determine the eligibility of individuals to access certain secure environments and to possess a firearms licence. This function is in line with amendments recently made to the Australian Crime Commission Act by the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Act 2026. Part 8 of the bill will provide a framework for timely intelligence sharing, enhancing the ACIC's ability to communicate intelligence to relevant agencies and bodies to support operational outcomes and other actions.”
“Search warrants are an important tool in intelligence gathering as they enable access to otherwise inaccessible information that is stored privately and securely. Part 6 of the bill will provide for the continuance of the ACIC's provision of national policing information systems and services. These systems are essential enablers that provide agencies with cross-jurisdictional information that supports frontline officers and enhances community safety. This will also include the provision of nationally coordinated criminal history checks, which support governments, businesses and other organisations to make informed decisions regarding a person's criminal history.”
“This framework will enable the ACIC to obtain intelligence relevant to serious and organised crime, by ensuring its capacity to gain close access to sensitive information via covert means. It will achieve this by enabling authorised persons to engage in unlawful conduct as outlined in a controlled intelligence operation authority. These operations are of critical importance as criminal actors and their enablers are becoming increasingly sophisticated and using complex methodologies to facilitate and commit crimes. Part 5 of the bill will also enable the ACIC to execute search warrants in relation to particular premises or persons, and related assistance orders, to obtain intelligence relevant to serious and organised crime.”
“Part 2 also provides for the making of guidelines relating to the use of personal information and other matters. Part 3 of the bill will establish a framework for the ACIC's exercise of coercive powers. This will include powers to conduct examinations, and to compel the provision of evidence, information, documents or things that would assist the agency to obtain intelligence relevant to serious and organised crime. Coercive powers remain a core capability for the agency and represent a significant value-add to help build a transnational picture of the serious and organised crime landscape to assist partners in targeting their efforts to disrupt and dismantle criminal networks. Part 4 of the bill will also establish a framework for the ACIC to conduct controlled intelligence operations.”
“The bill is informed by, and gives effect to, the government response to legislative recommendations of the Independent Review of the ACIC and associated Commonwealth law enforcement arrangements.The independent review recognised that the functions and powers vested in the ACIC are no longer fit-for-purpose and inhibit the ACIC from effectively fulfilling its intelligence mandate. Parts 1 and 2 of the bill comprehensively reform the ACIC by setting out its core functions. This includes the collection, use and communication of intelligence relevant to serious and organised crime, the provision of national policing information systems and services, the provision of criminal intelligence assessments, and cooperation with a range of entities.”
“It is essential that law enforcement agencies are supported by unique and insightful intelligence to more effectively direct their disruption efforts. The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission Bill 2026 will ensure the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission is repositioned as an intelligence-focused agency aimed at countering the national security threat that serious and organised crime poses. The bill will ensure that the ACIC has the necessary functions and powers to deliver this role, replacing theAustralian Crime Commission Act 2002.”
“Networks often span across a diverse range of crime types and illicit markets such as money laundering and drug trafficking. They are borderless, decentralised, digitally enabled and increasingly embedded in legitimate systems. Criminal actors operate to target Australia from offshore and online and use innovative methods and technologies to both advance and obscure their illicit business ventures. Law enforcement cannot combat the threat alone. Where we have a convergence of threats in this way we need to have a convergence of protection. To do this, Australia requires a national criminal intelligence agency equipped with the appropriate powers and capabilities to obtain and provide actionable intelligence on the complex and evolving criminal networks impacting Australia today and into the future.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Serious and organised crime threatens the safety and wellbeing of our communities and has a significant financial impact—estimated by the Australian Institute of Criminology to be $82.3 billion in 2023-24, a figure that rose more than $13 billion in a single year. The threat environment is complex and constantly evolving. Threats that were historically treated as separate are now converging and overlapping. Characteristics that were previously associated with terrorism, or foreign interference or child exploitation, are now converging with serious and organised crime. Serious and organised crime groups are opportunistic, highly adaptive, resilient and increasingly operate with the agility and sophistication of multinational businesses.”
“She rang me and said, 'Dad, they've asked me to do TV.' I thought, 'Oh my God, TV.' But the interview was amazing. I was incredibly proud of her. She told her story with grace—”
“Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I am very eager to speak on this bill. I strongly support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, which will ban the use of genetic test results in life insurance. It's been a long time coming, and I give an enormous and very warm shout-out to Dr Jane Tiller. She is irrepressible, with her intellect and her charm and her steadfast advocacy; no-one can avoid Jane. She first graced my office, I think, in late 2023 or early 2024, and her work has led to this. I have no hesitation in saying this. I've campaigned for this bill also—with Jane and more broadly for a long time—and I want to acknowledge my daughter. As part of the campaign, a couple of years ago, she spoke up in an ABC article. I was actually overseas at the time.”
“In the circumstances where individual visas are cancelled, which is a far more draconian measure—the alternative to the measure in this bill to suspend the travel ability to Australia—then there is no compensation scheme that applies. I don't know what else we can say except I'll finish on this point: the minister retains the power and the ability to exempt certain individuals in appropriate circumstances and still allow them, by issuing a certificate to come to Australia. That's a power that does not rest with the minister personally. It doesn't have to be exercised with the minister. It's not one or two a week in between other things. It's a power that can be given and will be given to the department, administered in the normal way for those kinds of circumstances which a number of members have outlined in the debate.”
“I'll be very brief. The government's view remains that the amendments in the bill demonstrate the government's commitment to protecting the integrity and sustainability of the migration system. The arrival control determination legislation is an important addition to the government's ability to regulate travel to Australia. I make the point again—and we've covered this repeatedly, so we are going to need to finish this debate and move on—that, currently, this can be achieved only through individually assessing each visa to determine whether there are grounds to cancel the visa. This is a task that the department does in all manner of visa categories and for individual visas every day, but it does take time and it's not appropriate for circumstances where there's an urgent response, at scale, that is required.”
“So I'm just not going to take the moral superiority, frankly, from people who overwhelmingly represent electorates with good Australians in them but are overwhelmingly not electorates where humanitarian migrants settle, whose community services don't get overwhelmed if we accept the kinds of propositions you're putting forward. I'm absolutely confident—and I'm just responding to the point you made in the debate—that the people I represent and that government members represent would support this legislation when they understand the practical consequences for their families and an orderly humanitarian migration program where our country is generous and we reserve the right to offer protection to the most vulnerable people out of an overwhelming case load with the strongest connection to Australia.”
“The proposition that's being put, behind the nice, well-meaning sentiment and words from the crossbench amendments, is that a random group of people from a given country who happen to have a temporary visa to Australia at this point in time—granted, before major events changed or conflicts broke out—and who might be coming for business, tourism or a whole range of other temporary reasons and may have no familial connection to Australia whatsoever somehow get privileged in the humanitarian program and given the precious right to seek asylum onshore in Australia over people in my community and government members' communities who've been waiting one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or 10 years trying to save their families.”
“I'll respond to one point very briefly. You made a number of colourful remarks about government members and multicultural communities. I represent the most multicultural part of Australia, actually, the City of Greater Dandenong. I'll be very, very clear: I am absolutely confident that people in my community and people in the Attorney-General's community and people in the member for Holt's community and the member for Parramatta's community will, when we sit down and explain the practical consequences of this bill, overwhelmingly support it.”
“Just to clarify the paperwork: I've got circulated (1) to (10). You moved (1) to (9). So, you're moving the compensation scheme separately. Is that correct? Yes? Fine. I'll be very brief. I've responded, I think, to all the arguments you put with previous amendments. I'll make two points. Just to confirm, at the end of the crossbench briefing, we were very clear that we were moving the bill in all stages through the House yesterday. That actually hasn't happened, because here we are this morning, with the opportunity to put amendments, to debate amendments and to comment on the bill. I maintain the point. Having said that we were moving it through the House, people were not in the chamber yesterday, with the exception of the member for Clark, who did not seek the call. But here we are, talking about the bill.”
“With respect, the proposition that you're putting forward completely destroys the ability of the settlement services sector to do that. It's well meaning. It might get you in the newspaper. But, in effect, it could be a giant spending measure. It's unreasonable, which restricts the ability of the minister to exercise these powers without a new appropriation of potentially billions and billions of dollars. The core point remains. The government's view is that this is necessary to protect the integrity of the visa system. I restate in closing: it's not a controversial proposition that, when someone receives a temporary visa to come to Australia, the Australian people remain confident that they are coming for a temporary purpose, not for another purpose. Question negatived.”
“We've already exceeded 30,000 places. My electorate is home to the largest community of Australians born in Afghanistan of any in this parliament. It's budgeted in advance and, importantly, it's linked to planning and service provision, to ensure that vulnerable people settle into Australia well. I'll choose my words carefully in observing that humanitarian migrants, at the kind of scale you're talking about, don't settle in your electorate. They settle in communities like mine. And it means an enormous amount to the people I and many of my colleagues represent that the humanitarian program is done in an orderly way, where the settlement infrastructure, schools, language schools and trauma support services can keep pace.”
“The amendment is well intentioned but frankly unworkable. It provides an open ended, unquantified suggestion that executive government would be compelled to issue a number of humanitarian visas linked to a random number of people from a given country who'd received temporary visas. The number of humanitarian entrants remains a matter for executive government. It's set thoughtfully and carefully through the budget process published in the budget papers. The government increased for four years the number of places to 20,000 per annum, up from 2022-23. In particular, as the member well knows, that was to accommodate people who'd worked for the Australian government for DFAT or served with Defence in Afghanistan, and we're more than honouring that commitment. We've committed to a minimum 26,500 places over four years.”
“I'll just address the new issues raised, because some of it goes to matters which I've addressed on the previous amendment, and we don't want to become the goldfish going round in the bowl, repeating ourselves all morning. I'll just address one procedural point. I wrote down the words; I think I got them right. The member indicated that the crossbench had been 'denied the call' yesterday. I'll just make the point that I don't think that's fair or accurate. There was none of the crossbench in the chamber when the bill was debated. No-one was denied the call; it moved on.”
“Those you mentioned—the broader definitions—are not considered immediate family under the well-established rules; they're close family or extended family members. So these are the very common practices. The final point I'd make is that extending visas in the way proposed would undermine the integrity of the visa system.”
“It provides for a maximum of six months, following which there is the ability to remake but not to extend or vary a previously made determination, and it would need to be remade at the point in time based on new facts and circumstances. It also provides the power for the minister to exempt individuals from the arrival control determination. Finally, with respect to the definition of families, the bill's definition of immediate family members aligns with common and well-established practice in such situations. It provides for the spouse or de facto partner and their dependent children or for the parents where the children may be Australians but the children are under 18. So, they are well-established definitions.”
“It exempts very explicitly people who are already in Australia within the migration zone, their immediate family and any holder of a temporary humanitarian visa or a bridging visa associated with those temporary humanitarian visa classes. There are additional safeguards such that the exercise of the power by way of legislative instrument requires the written agreement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister and therefore the involvement and scrutiny of their officials in those ministries. It also requires, with respect to parliamentary scrutiny, that the instrument and the associated reasons be tabled in both houses of parliament, which provides, in the government's view—given that this is a rarely used power for significant events—the appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.”
“I do appreciate the intent, but the government won't be supporting the amendments, and I'll touch on a few of the reasons in summary form. The change to the threshold that you outlined at the start would, in the government's view, render the provision practically unworkable. And I'd make the point that the entire visa system—every day, the judgements that the Department of Home Affairs make when issuing temporary visas or refusing them—rests on risk based judgements. You can never know things with certainty in advance. That's the operation of the entire visa system. With respect to the question of safeguards, the government's view remains that the safeguards that are provided for in the bill are appropriate. I'd restate that the bill doesn't affect or restrict the ability of a permanent visa holder of any kind to travel to Australia.”
“Any new visa application would be appropriately considered having regard to the applicant's intention, circumstances and other relevant matters at that time. This new framework will ensure that government can quickly take the necessary steps to manage risk before it manifests in Australia. It will also ensure that where risks can be appropriately managed, that travel limitations can be lifted as soon as it is in the national interest to do so. This bill allows Australia's visa system to continue to operate effectively and to the benefit of Australia. I commend the bill to the House.”
“If any 'permitted travel certificates' are issued, the legislation also requires the minister to table a report on the number issued in each six-month period. These requirements provide for appropriate transparency and accountability in relation to the exercise of the powers in this legislation. The determination will not operate to cancel anyone's visa or refuse the grant of a visa application. Once a determination ends, visa holders will be able to travel if their visa period is longer than the determination. If a noncitizen's temporary visa expires during the period of the determination, they are eligible to apply for a further visa. The determination suspends travel to Australia while it is in force—it is not a bar on visa applications.”
“An immediate family member of an Australian citizen or permanent resident. c. The holder of a temporary protection, refugee or humanitarian visa, or person who holds a bridging visa granted in association with one of these visas. There will also be the ability to exempt individuals from the determination on a case by case basis, enabling travel for those individuals by issuing a permitted travel certificate. This balances the need to act rapidly with flexibility to support certain individuals where appropriate—for example, in compelling or compassionate cases, or where it is in Australia's foreign policy interest or the public interest to do so. The determination would be required to be tabled in both houses of parliament, together with a statement of reasons.”
“It cannot be exercised in relation to any permanent visas. The determination can only be in effect for up to six months. It cannot be varied or extended, and must not be longer than the period that the minister considers appropriate in all the circumstances. A new determination can be issued upon expiry, but only where all elements of the legislative test are met. The determination will not impact a visa held by a non-citizen who is in Australia at the time the determination is made. This bill recognises the importance of family reunion and our international commitments. The bill expressly provides that the power to suspend a temporary visa will not apply, if at the time the determination is made, the non-citizen is: a. The parent of a child under 18 years old who is in Australia, b.”
“The minister may make an arrival control determination where an event or circumstance has occurred or is occurring outside Australia—and where one or both of the following apply: The minister must also be satisfied that it is in the national interest to make the determination. This would result in the temporary prevention of travel to Australia for those temporary visa holders covered by the determination, while it is in force. This will provide the government with time to assess the evolving situation and take the necessary steps to manage any risk to our national interest. This bill will strengthen the migration system and enable government to respond rapidly to any international crisis—importantly with a range of safeguards applying to this power. The determination is limited to temporary visas.”
“1) Bill 2026 will allow temporary restrictions on the arrival of certain classes of temporary visa holders in Australia, where it is necessary to protect the integrity and sustainability of Australia's immigration system. This includes when events or circumstances outside Australia mean that there is an increased risk that certain temporary visa holders will not depart Australia. The bill will expressly provide the Minister for Home Affairs, with the written agreement of the Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, the power to make an 'arrival control determination' in relation to a class or classes of non-citizens.”
“In these circumstances, it is vital that government can respond appropriately, including by placing temporary limitations on the ability of certain cohorts of non-citizens from travelling to Australia. Without legislative change, the only way to prevent travel to Australia by persons holding valid visas is to individually assess whether there are grounds to cancel each visa—a process which is not suited to responding efficiently to international conflict or other rapid international developments where thousands of visas may be affected simultaneously. As we have seen with this conflict and recent global shocks, the migration system must be able to respond quickly and at scale to events where it may be necessary to limit travel to Australia on a temporary basis. The Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Australian government is committed to ensuring Australia's migration system works in Australia's national interest. At any point in time, there are many temporary visa holders outside Australia holding a temporary right of entry to Australia granted to support travel for a genuinely temporary purpose like a holiday or attending a conference. The current situation in the Middle East demonstrates how quickly circumstances can change that may impact whether those temporary visa holders could fulfil that temporary purpose in Australia, including whether they would leave Australia should they travel here.”
“The member for La Trobe's hand picked Liberal candidate turned up and announced double the money, but anyway we're reviewing it. I do actually feel sorry for the opposition. I do.”
“I'll firstly associate myself with your remarks at the end. Ayatollah Khamenei was an evil dictator. I don't mourn his death. I made remarks about this in the Federation Chamber on Monday morning, which I put on social media. He was a terrorist in breach of the United Nations nuclear program sanctions and a person who has for 37 years or thereabouts—for decades—oppressed his own people and been responsible for the murder of countless—hundreds of thousands, most likely, of his own citizens. The Minister for Multicultural Affairs addressed the point you made regarding an election commitment in question time. She's put that on hold and is reviewing it. I can also share with the House that two days after we announced that commitment, there was a press release.”
“Australia has no role in this conflict, and it's up to the combatants to explain how their actions comply with international law. (Time expired)”
“But also for the Afghan community—there are tens of thousands of close family members of Australians, who fled the Taliban, sheltering in Iran right now. They are partners, children, parents, brothers and sisters of Australians. The government has upgraded the travel alerts to 'do not travel' for countries across the region. There are many questions being received on visas. The situation in the Middle East is such that the Department of Home Affairs is unable to operate at all in Iran and is severely limited across the region. We advise Australians to leave safely if they can and to register with Smartraveller. There's an emergency portal open for Australians in Iran and Israel, for citizens, permanent residents and family who already have the right of entry into Australia.”
“For decades he's overseen the murder of untold tens or hundreds of thousands of his own citizens and the oppression of millions, breaching —any concept of human rights in a modern world. He's been a sponsor of terror across the region and the globe, the head of a nuclear weapons program, in violation of United Nations sanctions and resolutions, and a threat to global peace. Whilst many Iranian Australians, they are also saddened, worried about family and loved ones and civilian casualties, and fearful of what may come next. As the Foreign Minister said, it's up to the Iranian people to determine their destiny. They're a beautiful, cultured, educated people, the inheritors of the Persian civilisation. I hope they can seize the moment and reclaim their country from extremists.”
“Thursday to Sunday into Eid, come on down. It's a big month of course, with Christians marking Lent, in the lead-up to Easter, and Chinese Lunar New Year, or Tet in the Vietnamese calendar—the Year of the Fire Horse. But, despite the celebrations, it's also a very difficult time for thousands of people in my community, given the violent conflict in Iran and the Middle East. Tens of thousands of Australians are worried about family and loved ones. For Iranian Australians, there are mixed feelings. There were celebrations in Melbourne, Sydney and elsewhere at the death of the ayatollah—a murderous dictator, the head of an evil regime responsible for orchestrating attacks here on Australian soil.”
“One of the coolest new things in south-east Melbourne is the Ramadan night markets in Dandenong. Everyone was superexcited to welcome the Prime Minister on the first night. There was an incredibly warm welcome. He was mobbed by wellwishers. It started last year and it took Melbourne by storm. Hundreds of thousands of people came through in the first year, and this year it's twice the size. We provided an election commitment of $225,000 over three years to help with the safety, security and staging. It is a safe, welcoming and family-friendly environment, with kebabs, drinks and rides for the kids. Perhaps the best thing about it is to see Muslim and non-Muslim Australians all mingling in the streets, having a great time and enjoying the markets together, sharing an iftar in the holy month of Ramadan in the Islamic cultural tradition.”
“Her worst days in the job of less than a year have been when she's been forced to do things by the conservative men on the backbench. The real mystery in this—watching it unfold, unedifying, over the last few weeks and months—is for what? For why? Why are they trying to rip down a centrist woman who's leading their political party? There's no policy. There are no ideas. There's no vision. There's no articulation of values, just an assertion they have some. The guy who's apparently going to challenge—he's just 'born to rule' entitlement. Apparently, it was his destiny to lead the Liberal Party from when he moved from Sydney, from his mansion, to Goulburn—was it?—to stand for the vacancy in the electorate of Hume. And it was going to be his destiny to lead the Liberal Party—just 'born to rule' entitlement.”
“From day one, he's been out there undermining, making sure that she could never succeed. The truth is that Liberal Party members, mainly men who mainly wear the same blue suit—sometimes it's hard to tell them apart—have never accepted the fact that a woman was elected to lead their political party. Well, under standing order 76(c), on debating public affairs, it's very relevant to what's happening today. They are ripping down the first woman to lead the Liberal Party. They've never accepted that a woman could lead the Liberal Party. I've said, on many occasions, that the opposition leader, many days, looks utterly hopeless, but, honestly, what chance did she ever have? What chance was she given? To be fair to her, all the alternatives are worse. At least she looks somewhat normal some days, but she's always been at her worst.”
“There are also more Medicare urgent care clinics. So those are three bits of good news, relating to Medicare, free TAFE and cost of living. It's a bit of a contrast, though, and the contrast has never been sharper or starker with the collapsing coalition clown show—the chaos and the circus that those on that side of the chamber have become. The meltdown has reached new proportions. As I speak, there's a conga line of them still lining up to quit the frontbench. We haven't seen too many House members—presumably they'll do that after question time today—but the senators have been lining up to rip down the first woman elected to lead the Liberal Party in Australia's history. The truth is that she was never given a chance. From day one, when the member for Hume lost the ballot, they were split in two. She won by a couple of votes.”
“The focus on women's health under this government—the first government in Australia's history in which a majority of the members are women, reflecting the population—has seen a focus on issues that matter for women and have been too long neglected. We are expanding the five per cent deposits for all first home buyers, delivering another pay rise to aged-care nurses following the first instalment in March and freezing the draft beer excise indexation for two years—a small cost-of-living measure but particularly aimed at helping small independent breweries in the hospitality sector. We are cutting student debt by 20 per cent. Wiping that student debt means repayments are made earlier, and we are raising the income thresholds at which people are being forced to repay their student loans. The average saving is $5½ thousand.”
“There is paid prac, transformative for nursing students, teaching students, social work students and midwifery students, who previously were basically pushed into poverty, being forced to complete these compulsory hours as part of their qualification but not being able to be paid for them. It's alright if you're from a wealthy family, but, for millions of Australians, that would not be an option given their economic circumstances. There is the boost to Medicare—$1.8 billion in extra hospital funding, helping Australians get the quality, affordable health care that they deserve—and the news—I think last week—of a record increase in hospital funding to the states and territories over the next five years. We are providing more choice, lower costs and high-quality care for Australian women.”