Angie Bell
Moncrieff · Liberal National Party · Australia
“Twice the Prime Minister was directly asked whether he could guarantee that house prices wouldn't tank as a result of his government's housing policies; twice he refused to answer.”
“At the same time, the government's own budget papers show rents are set to rise. Do those opposite realise that cheaper house prices mean nothing when the cost of living makes it impossible to save for a deposit? We already see young Australians locked out of independence, forced to live at home longer as rental stress worsens.”
“Over 2½ thousand people experience homelessness on the Gold Coast on any given night, and the money raised from this event will go directly to supporting those locals getting back on their feet. I want to thank everyone who donated so generously to the CEO Sleepout.”
“Back to the bill in front of us, this is a bill that changes a process, to give more power to a minister—the same minister who had to pay back the debt—and a bill that nobody has asked for. The government has not justified the need for a change in process.”
“Labor is more interested in their bottom line than supporting grassroots sport and the communities—like the communities of everybody in this place—who rely on it. At a time when families are tightening their belts, affordable community sport has never been more important.”
“I want to start by talking about sport, the inspiration that is sport and what it can do for young lives. I was inspired, as the federal member for Moncrieff, just a few weeks ago when I attended the Benowa State School, where there was a boccia tournament for three primary schools across my electorate.”
The complete record
Every one of 431 lines we hold for Angie Bell, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 9.
“In a further blow to industry groups and business, they've been providing feedback to the minister on these reforms—indeed, the minister has been spruiking just how much engagement he has been undertaking—but none of their most significant contributions have been included in these reforms, to the point of Labor now producing something absolutely unworkable for Australian businesses. This is in stark contrast to the minister's message claiming that his reforms are balanced and 'a demonstrable gain for business and the environment'; that was his claim. If business and investors are turned away or if applications take too long to approve, jobs are foregone and lost, and it's the green light for investment to go offshore. This current proposal does not work for Australia's best interests.”
“The question is: why has Roger Cook been silent on the current proposed reforms, especially when business is telling us the current proposal before the House is completely unworkable? Is there another intervention coming from the west to save some of those FIFO workers from their jobs? Is it disappointing that Labor's proposed reforms are not workable for business in their current state and do not fix productivity? We've heard that not only are these proposed reforms unworkable; some stakeholders are even going as far as to say that these reforms are worse than the current legislation—worse than 26-year-old laws that we all agree are broken. That's saying something.”
“As I mentioned earlier, we know Labor has failed to deliver any reform in the last three years. Labor has a history of failure to deliver and that remains true, as evidenced by this reform. When the member for Sydney was the minister, her proposed legislation would have made productivity worse. The laws were so bad that the Western Australian premier had to run an intervention, and the Prime Minister pulled the pin on the reforms the night before they were due to be voted on in the chamber. These were desperate messages followed by desperate actions during desperate times for this government. Since then, we've seen the distance—call it a wedge, if you like—between Minister Plibersek and the Prime Minister.”
“When the Leader of the Opposition was the minister for the environment, the Christmas Island Marine Park was declared, as was the Cocos (Keeling) Islands Marine Park. In that same year the coalition announced $1 billion for the Great Barrier Reef fund, and our $280 million Recycling Modernisation Fund drove a $1 billion transformation of the waste and recycling sector. We invested billions in threatened species, habitat restoration, marine conservation and environmental projects. We have the environmental credentials on action. I believe in good environmental policy and investment that delivers great outcomes for business and nature. I believe in protecting the environment for Australians. I believe in investing in the environment for Australians.”
“The coalition believes environmental laws, when done right, can be a great, balanced outcome for business and the environment. We have a strong record on the environment. In fact, we have a proud Liberal history on the environment. The Great Barrier Reef was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1981 during Malcolm Fraser's time as Prime Minister. Fraser and his government had already taken steps to protect the reef, including the prohibition of oil-drilling in the area. During the Howard government, great Liberal warrior for the environment Robert Hill declared the Great Australian Bight a marine park. In 2000 the Lord Howe Island Marine Park was proclaimed, also under the Howard government.”
“It's an insult to Australians, and it's an insult to stakeholders. The coalition has known the importance of this environmental reform. We've long known about it, since it was introduced by Robert Hill back in 2001, when he said it would last only 10-15 years. Now, here we are in year 26, and still no reforms. When we were in government, the Leader of the Opposition, then environment minister commissioned the Graeme Samuel review—a review with recommendations that are largely proving to be the reference point to these key legislative changes under the reform. As environment minister, the Leader of the Opposition introduced legislation to reform this bill. Labor and the Greens blocked it. Now, Minister Watt—the Prime Minister's Mr Fix-It—is coming to us with his tail between his legs, needing us to strike a deal.”
“We need to look to preserve our environment and mitigate the risk posed to our native threatened species. The government has been working on environmental reform for three years now. We saw Minister Plibersek's friendless proposal fail to deliver last term. After Minister Watt was appointed, he said, 'It is my intention to deliver these reforms within the next 18 months.' So why, all of a sudden, did this become the great race—the great Melbourne Cup race—to get this legislation passed before Christmas? Why? Why give stakeholders, proponents, and those that will be affected by this legislation just a smidge over the finish line of three weeks? That's what the minister is outlining. Expecting stakeholders to sift through 1,459 pages of the biggest legislative reform to the act since its inception is an absolute joke.”
“We agree something needs to change and to be done to amend these outdated environmental laws to speed up the lack of growth under Labor's watch. Australia needs to create jobs. We need to encourage investment and opportunity for her citizens, not imperil our nation's wealth and our future under this government. If we don't do something now, those opposite risk major repercussions, major flaws, major oversights and major damage. The way they're tracking, AUKUS is potentially at risk. The Prime Minister's shiny new key critical minerals deal with the US is absolutely at risk. They risk sending jobs and investment in resources and mining offshore with this legislation. I can assure you, we're much better off keeping those here in Australia than in other countries with a far worse track record on polluting our environment.”
“Our global productivity ranking has literally tanked under this government. It has tanked absolutely. Australia's productivity growth is ranked second-last amongst OECD countries, beating only Mexico. The proof is in the pudding, with a sluggish 0.2 per cent productivity growth in the June 2025 quarter, and in the last financial year labour productivity fell by 0.7 per cent. A lack of investment in resources has significantly contributed to this downturn. It's largely owing to the copious amounts of red and green tape under Labor's first term—not in this term, not what they're doing now, but what they did in the last term. We've seen more than 5,000 new regulations—not 500—tying mainstream Australians in knots.”
“The minister has done the rounds of the press gallery, spruiking these bills as balanced reform, but nothing about this legislation is balanced. It's going to send productivity backwards. But hang on—don't those opposite have a so-called productivity agenda? What about the Treasurer's productivity roundtable, which was crucial for jobs, business and growth? Those opposite must have a pretty short memory, because in their current state these reforms are guaranteed to halt productivity in its tracks. That is saying something, because, as Australians have noticed, Australia already has a productivity problem. Economists warn, as reported in the Australian Financial Review late last September, that lagging investment by Australian businesses in research and development is contributing to a plunge in our country's productivity.”
“I rise to speak on the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, the first of seven bills, which will now be considered separately, on the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. As I've said from the very start of this process, when I became the shadow minister for the environment, environmental reform is too important to get wrong. I speak to mainstream Australians about this, about the things that impact them, and there are many things wrong with this reform from those opposite. The importance of getting this right should not be understated. Without balanced reform that ensures the best possible outcome for industry, productivity and the environment, we are simply greenlighting offshore investment. What does that mean to mainstream Australians? That means job losses.”
“The list of this government's failures continues to grow. This extinction is a stain on our tragic environmental record, because Australia leads the world in mammal extinctions and ranks second—second—for loss of biodiversity. The environmental credentials this government claims to have were all washed up during the harmful algal bloom in South Australia. Now we can rightly say their so-called environmental credentials are completely and utterly extinct. It looks like the Prime Minister's Mr Fixit can't fix this one.”
“We're very happy on this side that the beard's gone. Australia is the best country in the world, with the most iconic flora and fauna. Our ecosystem is unique and must be protected, but it seems to be going backwards under this government. Australia's only shrew the Christmas Island shrew, has been added to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's red list of extinct species this month. This marks Australia's 39th extinction—a sobering and tragic statistic. This government has stood idly by as this mouse sized mammal has gone extinct. The former environment minister, the member for Sydney, committed to preventing extinctions under this Albanese Labor government. Now we have seen yet another failure—another broken promise from this government that is all talk and no action when it comes to preserving our native species.”
“The Gold Coast region is home to an inspiring calibre of talent, resilience and entrepreneurial spirit. The Gold Coast Women in Business program provides a meaningful opportunity to shine a light on those businesswomen who continue to break new ground. These awards are more than just accolades; they're a testament to the courage, the creativity and the commitment of Gold Coast women. I want to extend my congratulations to all the winners of the 2025 Gold Coast Women in Business Awards and say to them: 'Keep on keeping on; you are the engine room of the Gold Coast economy. You make me very proud.'”
“The Gladys Moncrieff Multicultural Appreciation Award was presented to Pushpinder Oberoi for his dedication to the GOPIO community across the Gold Coast. Our inaugural Gladys Moncrieff Service to Veterans Award went to Mark Swain for the great work that he does with the veterans at the Nerang RSL. The Gladys Moncrieff Community Club Champion Award went to the wonderful Mr Jeff Burchell—you are the glue that holds our community together, and I'm extremely proud to be your member and to represent you in Canberra. Another example of glue that keeps our community together is Gold Coast Women in Business. This year I was thrilled to be bestowed the honour of national ambassador for the women in business awards for 2025 by founder Karen Phillips. Over the years, I've seen this event grow in numbers and indeed prestige.”
“The awards provide us with the opportunity to recognise our volunteers for the contributions that they make to the central Gold Coast community. We're so lucky to have many volunteers, who do the hard yards in the community and give up their time, their love and their support to provide a helping hand when required. Congratulations to all the recipients at this year's Moncrieff community awards. I also congratulate our Gladys Moncrieff award recipients. This year I expanded the award from one individual award to four speciality awards. The Gladys Moncrieff Women in Leadership Award was presented to Indiah Collingridge for Little Grubbs Orchard and the work that she does there for children.”
“Volunteers have a strong presence throughout the Gold Coast community, whether it's helping out with local sporting teams or responding to natural disasters or emergencies or helping local charities. Volunteers and volunteering have never been more important than they are today, with so many people who need extra support. Last Thursday it gave me great pleasure to once again host the Moncrieff Community Volunteer Awards at Merrimac State High School on the Gold Coast. Merrimac State High was very generous in providing the space for me to host these awards for a third year in a row. Thank you to Principal Rachel Cutajar, the whole Merrimac team—her school leaders as well—and the Gold Cost community for their continued support of this event.”
“We need certainty and we need balance—certainty for industry and jobs, and balance for the environment and protections. We simply cannot continue to operate with the legislation in its current form. I'll continue to speak with the government to see where we can move amendments, where we can come to the middle or if Labor will split the bill. We cannot wrap industry up in additional red and green tape. We must protect our environment. There is a way forward.”
“It was an investment that saw renewables ultimately make up almost one-third of our energy mix. We have a proud history of environmental conservation in our party, and they are just some of the many initiatives and investments made by the coalition. So, when we say the government is again rushing through complex, untested legislation, we have the credentials to back that up, going all the way back to Malcolm Fraser, who put protections on the Great Barrier Reef. When industry backs up these claims, you know there are alarm bells ringing. This legislation will put billions and billions of dollars of investment and thousands of Australian jobs at risk. Instead of speeding up decisions, they're creating a system that will stop projects dead in their tracks.”
“Despite what those on the other side of the House claim, the coalition supports genuine environmental reform. We strongly believe we need to care for the environment. The coalition's record on the environment, particularly under the Leader of the Opposition's leadership as environment minister, is one we are so very proud of. As the minister, she led the development of reforms to fix the approvals process. In 2022 the coalition announced a $1 billion Great Barrier Reef fund. Our $280 million Recycling Modernisation Fund drove a $1 billion transformation of the waste and recycling sector. We invested billions in threatened species, habitat restoration, marine conservation and environmental projects. And, under the Morrison government, Australia's investment in renewable energy continued to break records.”
“In the letter that the Leader of the Opposition and I penned to the Prime Minister, we proposed that the bill be split to prioritise and streamline approvals, because that's what is urgent, while dealing with the contentious measures separately. The proposal that we put forward, which the government flat out rejected, will cut sovereign risk and restore business confidence, along with helping to unlock critical minerals and other major projects. The coalition supports genuine environmental reform. Splitting the bill means parliament can move immediately on these reforms. Again, we know they're long overdue and we know that approvals are taking far, far too long. We must ensure jobs and growth without being held hostage by Labor's more controversial proposals.”
“To appease the green groups? To keep the door open for negotiations with the Greens? Or to appease the left faction of the Labor caucus? It seems like a contrast to Labor's so-called productivity agenda because the proposed plan might please the far-left activists, but it seriously risks Australian jobs, projects and prosperity. Australia can protect the environment and still get things built right now. Labor's laws will do neither because every added layer of bureaucracy makes it harder for projects to get off the ground. That makes it easier for investment and jobs to go offshore. Labor's reckless decision to prioritise the interests of green groups over jobs and productivity puts reform on life support. We suggested a genuine option to fast-track and streamline reforms right now.”
“Environmental law reform is well overdue. We can agree on that. That view is very much shared by those on both sides of the House. So why is it that this Labor government is yet to get the balance right? We've said that from the beginning. We need to ensure that jobs and investment continue whilst minimising the impact on the environment—it's important to note that investment is in decline in this country—so this reform is simply too important to get wrong. In its current form, and from the amount of draft legislation that we've seen, Labor's environmental laws risk being nothing but a gift to our overseas competitors. It will be a blow to Australian industry, business and workers. That's jobs, income, families and communities. This also risks the government's latest critical minerals deal with the US, and for what?”
“Above all, our task in this place is to ensure that Australia's welfare system remains one that supports people in genuine need, provides real pathways to independence and sustains itself for the generations yet to come. That is the coalition's enduring commitment to fairness, to responsibility and to the integrity of the Australian social security system.”
“As outlined earlier in my contribution, the coalition will closely examine and consider the resolution scheme legislative instrument once it is tabled. We will insist that the government explain how the resolution scheme will operate in practice, how fairness will be guaranteed and how integrity of the bill's measures will be maintained across all aspects of the social security system. Every dollar spent through the social security system is a dollar earned by hardworking Australians. It is our responsibility, indeed our duty, to ensure that those dollars are spent justly and wisely—in ways that strengthen rather than weaken the foundations of our safety net—and that any fraud is dealt with appropriately.”
“These are issues that must be addressed before the parliament can have full confidence in the practical effect of these amendments. As the coalition, we will continue to be constructive where we can. We recognise that the bill contains technical corrections and seeks to address longstanding administrative challenges. But we will also continue to hold the government to account on how it develops and implements these measures. The Australian people deserve transparency, accountability and confidence that their parliament is doing its job. We will not oppose this legislation in the House today. However, our concerns remain about the absence of essential operational details on the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme from this primary legislation.”
“Without clear criteria, there is a real risk of inconsistent decision-making and unequal treatment of applicants. We must ask: how will Services Australia seek information from victims-survivors of coercive social security debt, and how will staff be supported to make informed and compassionate decisions? These are not academic questions; they go to the heart of how the law will affect real people. Minister Plibersek, in her second reading speech, said that existing safeguards would be strengthened to prevent manipulation of the waiver system, yet no detail has been provided on what these strengthened safeguards will look like or how they will operate to prevent misuse or manipulation of the social security safety net.”
“Due to the absence of these essential details in the primary legislation, parliament's capacity to properly scrutinise the scheme has been limited. The coalition has been advised that schedule 3, which establishes the resolution scheme, will cost approximately $97.2 million over the forward estimates. Once the delegated legislation is tabled, we will closely examine and consider those instruments to ensure that the scheme is fair to those affected by income apportionment and fair to taxpayers who foot the bill. There are also unresolved questions about how the special circumstances waiver will operate in practice. The bill provides little detail about the measures, procedures and thresholds that will guide Services Australia in deciding whether special circumstances do exist.”
“If the government acknowledges that income apportionment was used unlawfully for years, then the question of how that impacts those who face prosecution or conviction as a result cannot simply be left unanswered. Further, the bill leaves many operational details unresolved. It's not clear how the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme will interact with the Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration, the longstanding framework for compensating individuals adversely affected by administrative errors. Much, it seems, is being left to legislative instruments—we hear this a lot from this government—meaning that critical decisions about the design and implementation of the scheme will be made outside the direct scrutiny of the parliament. That is deeply concerning.”
“As a result, scrutiny has been rushed, with only a single day allocated for Senate committee examination. That inquiry heard almost exclusively from social service advocacy and not-for-profit organisations. Many other key stakeholders were simply not consulted. This narrow consultation raises legitimate concerns about how many voices the government listened to when preparing the bill. The Ombudsman, in its submission to the Senate inquiry, highlighted a serious omission—namely, that the issue of remediation for individuals who have been criminally convicted in relation to debts that were invalidly calculated using income apportionment is not addressed in the bill. That is not what we would call a minor point. It goes to the heart of fairness, accountability and justice.”
“It appears that the income apportionment measures have been informed by the Commonwealth Ombudsman's own-motion investigation and recommendations, yet we are told that there was no direct consultation with the Ombudsman in the development of this legislation. The Ombudsman instead used the Senate committee process to contribute to the bill. That's an extraordinary omission. If the measures stem from the Ombudsman's own findings, it would be reasonable to expect the government to have engaged directly with that office to ensure the legislation aligns with those recommendations. The second issue is that the timing of this bill raises serious questions. The government has waited until the tail end of the sitting calendar to bring this legislation forward.”
“Another significant measure is the establishment of the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. The scheme will provide resolution payments to people whose debts were affected by income apportionment between 20 September 2003 and 6 December 2020. The bill gives the minister power to determine matters relating to the scheme through legislative instrument, and it provides for a new special appropriation to fund these resolution payments. While these measures are significant, they are not without concern. The first issue relates to the process by which this legislation has been developed.”
“It also clarifies the lawful methods of apportioning employment income when determining debts or rates of payment for periods before that date. The bill expands the instances in which the special circumstances waiver can be applied to waive debts incurred under the relevant acts. The bill increases to $250 the threshold for waiving a small debt and provides for that threshold to be indexed annually to the CPI. It also provides for a one-off waiver of the Commonwealth's right to recover small undetermined debts worth less than $250 that are currently recorded in Services Australia's system but have yet to be raised. The number of undetermined debts has increased substantially in recent years due to COVID measures and the pausing of debts during the pandemic and times of natural disaster.”
“2) Bill 2025 contains four schedules that amend a number of acts, including A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999, the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010, the Social Security Act 1991 and the Student Assistance Act 1973. These technical amendments in the bill have significant consequences for how social security payments are administered and how debts and undetermined debts are treated. The bill also includes provisions providing clarity to income apportionment, a practice introduced under Labor. The bill seeks to do several things. It sets out preliminary and definitional matters as well as income apportionment method statements. It validates income apportionment as a method of apportioning employment income in relation to entitlement periods before 7 December 2020.”
“We also permanently increased the income-free area to $150 a fortnight, giving jobseekers greater flexibility and incentive to take on work as they re-entered the workforce. During the height of the pandemic, one of the greatest economic and social challenges of our generation, the coalition government provided $32 billion in emergency support payments to help Australians get through. This is the record of a coalition government that understands the balance between compassion and responsibility, between helping those that need help and ensuring that the system remains fair to those who fund it. Turning to the bill before the House, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No.”
“That principle has guided our approach to social policy, and it continues to guide our thinking in opposition. Of course, these priorities are all the more critical during what has become an enduring Labor induced cost-of-living crisis, which is not going away—a time when Australian households are struggling to keep up with rising expenses, high interest rates and stagnant wages. When in government, the coalition demonstrated disciplined and responsible economic management. Through that approach, we were able to deliver the largest permanent increase to the JobSeeker payment at that time, ensuring that while there was a safety net for those in need, focus remained on supporting people into employment. In April 2021, the coalition increased working-age payment rates, including JobSeeker, by $50 a fortnight.”
“Our focus must be on ensuring that more Australians are working, contributing to and strengthening the economy, not on keeping people connected to welfare unnecessarily. The welfare system must always be fit for purpose; it must evolve to meet tomorrow's challenges, not remain anchored in the past. Income support should provide a strong and sustainable safety net, protecting our most vulnerable citizens, supporting those experiencing hardship, and providing clear and practical pathways to independence and self-reliance. The coalition's attention remains on creating jobs and getting Australians back into work, because we know that getting a job is the single best way to improve the living standards of individuals and their families.”
“It's funded by those on the front line, the nurses who work the night shift, the teachers who shape the minds of our children and the police who put themselves in harm's way to keep our community safe. Every dollar spent on social security is a dollar that someone else has earned. That reality imposes a clear responsibility on all of us in this place. It means that every measure, every amendment and every program must be justified. It must be fair, it must be sustainable and it must serve the purpose of helping Australians in genuine need, while maintaining the integrity of the system for the future. We also have a duty to our future generations. The decisions we make today about the structure and sustainability of the welfare system will determine the cost that future Australians will bear.”
“Our safety net is not funded by government; it is funded by real people—small-business owners, primary producers and those who work on the front line of our essential services. It is funded by small businesses that take risks every single day. They invest their savings, their homes and their livelihoods into building something for themselves, their families and their communities. These are the people who drive innovation and create jobs, who build the very opportunities that allow our economy to thrive. Our safety net is funded by our primary producers, the men and women who work the land through fire, drought and floods, who keep Australians fed and who export beyond our shores, strengthening our national economy.”
“I rise today to speak on the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House of Representatives; however, we do have significant concerns about aspects of the legislation that warrant further scrutiny. At all times you must remember that Australia's social services safety net is one of the strongest and most generous in the world, but it's not self-sustaining. It must be managed responsibly, because it's funded by Australian taxpayers—people who work hard, take risks and carry the task of supporting our social security system. Few countries in the world provide the kind of social safety net that we enjoy here in Australia. It's something we should be proud of, but it's also something we must safeguard and protect.”
“The Closing the gap : annual data compilation report provides a sobering reminder of this government's failures. Now in his fourth year, this distracted prime minister has failed to deliver meaningful change. The gap is not closing. It is widening. Of the 19 national targets, just four are on track. That is one less than last year. For too many targets, the data is missing, unreliable or outdated. In fact, only 10 targets had updated figures. And, for crucial areas such as family safety, the numbers were simply not reliable. This is the reality that Indigenous communities face. They are struggling. Women and children remain unsafe, and this government is failing Indigenous Australians. Minister, how can Australians have any faith that this government can close the gap when progress has gone backwards on your watch?”
“In 2023-24, there were 46 female victims of intimate partner homicide. One in four women have experienced intimate partner violence since the age of 15. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are 33 times more likely to be hospitalised due to family violence—it's a sickening number—and up to seven times more likely to be victims of homicide. Between 2022 and 2024, sexual assaults rose by 17 per cent, while family violence related homicides and related offences increased by nearly 65 per cent. Minister, with the latest ABS crime statistics for 2024 from across Australia showing domestic violence and sexual assaults on the rise, and the significant delay in the rollout of funding from your so-called rapid review, what is the Albanese government doing now to ensure frontline services have the resources you promised?”
“They're doing it tougher than ever before. One in six families reported being very concerned about their current financial situation and financial future. Even with a strong labour market and an increasingly mature superannuation system, our social security system supports more than six million Australians at a cost of $152 billion in 2025-26. This represents 19 per cent of all government expenditure. And, under the Albanese government, the number of long-term JobSeeker recipients—that is, those on payments for more than two years—is on the rise. It's increasing. Minister, what macro issues will increase the number of social security recipients, and what measures are in your budget to reduce the reliance of Australians on our social security safety net? Family and domestic violence remains at unacceptably high levels in our nation.”
“Then, on 26 June, the Prime Minister went further still, with responsibility for disability policy transferred to Health, while the delivery of services and payments relating to social security, health and government services, along with whole-of-government service delivery policy, was transferred to the Finance portfolio. These decisions were not just administrative; they were a clear signal—a signal that this prime minister had little confidence in his own minister. That's hardly a ringing endorsement of either the Minister for Social Services or the previous minister for social services over the past three years under Labor. Can the minister outline what impact these significant changes to the department's responsibilities will have on its budget and your influence around the cabinet table? Australians are simply doing it tough.”
“Clearly, since the federal budget in March, we've had a federal election. Traditionally, after an election, where there is no change of government, we might expect only minor adjustments, such as a reshuffle of ministerial line-ups and a few tweaks in responsibilities across those portfolios. After this most recent election, what we saw in the Social Services portfolio was far from minor. On 13 May, the Prime Minister made substantial changes to the administrative arrangement orders, the mechanism by which executive responsibility is allocated amongst ministers. These changes dramatically reduce the responsibilities of the Minister for Social Services. Housing, rental and homelessness policy were stripped from the portfolio. The National Disability Insurance Scheme and foundational supports were also removed.”
“What else will be mismanaged in the environment portfolio this time? I call on the minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water to front up and answer these questions. The minster could at least be in this chamber, as coalition ministers were during consideration in detail under our government.”
“It's clear that South Australians have been hung out to dry by their governments. This environmental catastrophe is being completely and utterly mismanaged by this government under this minister. Governments at both levels failed to act for months, and, when they did take notice, it was too little and too late. When they did act, it was evident that there was a major gap in communications between state and federal governments, as evidenced in last month's Senate inquiry. Why did it take the department over two months to become aware of the issue, and why did it then take another two months for the department to brief the minister? This is mismanagement. This is an utter disgrace. All Australians, including by the minister for Adelaide's beaches, Mark Butler, have been let down.”
“Can I ask the minister representing the environment minister: how much is that hotline costing taxpayers, and is that coming out of the existing funding allocation that was meant to support the clean-up and scientific research and to keep businesses afloat? I have some news for you, Minister: those affected cannot even access the available financial relief because of the layers of bureaucracy. Bart Butson, who I met with twice, is just one of the many fishos who cannot access financial support due to the ridiculous criteria. Their spin doctors are working overtime to have you think that this Labor government is the saviour for South Australians. But—newsflash, Minister—South Australians are not mugs. No, they're not. They can see right through your spin. This bloom is double the size of the ACT and can now be seen from space.”
“These are just a fraction of the thousands upon thousands of dead marine creatures, including dolphins, that have washed up on South Australian beaches. The death toll has now ballooned to over 34,000 creatures. This algal bloom can cause suffocation and death. But it isn't just marine life suffering; it's the people of South Australia: the tourism operators, the small businesses, the fishers. They've all been let down by the state and federal governments. Skin irritation, rashes, coughing fits and sneezing—that's the reality for most who come within 300 metres of their tainted beaches. Just last week the government announced an algal-bloom hotline.”
“But wait—didn't the department say that they weren't aware of the impact until the end of May? So it's no wonder South Australians have lost trust in this government. It then took 10 days—10 days—for the minister to even visit the state, following the formal briefing. I know you've all seen the PR shot of him at West Beach. For those who are not from South Australia—as I am, or was, originally—West Beach is not very far from the airport; in fact, it's around three minutes in the car. Since that desperate, last-minute dash and abysmal funding package, let's take a look at some of those sea-creatures that have suffered: 61 leafy sea dragons—beautiful creatures; 604 Port Jackson sharks; 2,000 fiddler rays; 287 bluespotted goatfish.”