Zali Steggall
Warringah · Independent · Australia
“These amendments don't prevent the government from reforming the NDIS. They don't prevent the government from managing costs and they don't prevent the government from improving sustainability, but they do ensure that participants can seek reassessment when their plan no longer meets their needs.”
“The NDIS was built on a simple promise that Australians with disability would have access to the reasonable and necessary supports they needed to live with dignity, participate in the community and exercise choice and control over their own lives. The NDIS must be sustainable. It must be well governed.”
“If a decision has a practical effect of cutting a participant's support, then it should be treated as it is: a decision that affects that participant. Put simply, if your funding is significantly cut, you should have review rights. The third amendment deals with the review rights where funding is significantly reduced.”
“I rise to recognise the incredible work of some incredibly passionate women at the Arise Foundation and to call for greater investment in recovery and healing for women leaving violence. For too many women, the crisis does not end when they leave.”
“Reform must not mean that people are pushed away from work, study or volunteering because the supports that make participation possible have been overlooked by a system that has become more and more automated. The first amendment deals with plan reassessment.”
“by leave—I move amendments (1) to (4) as circulated in my name together: (1) Schedule 1, item 21, page 9 (line 22), at the end of subsection 48A(1), add: ; and (e) alternatively to paragraphs (a) to(d), the participant demonstrates that: (i) the supports are no longer available; or (ii) the plan is insufficient to meet the participant's r…”
The complete record
Every one of 837 lines we hold for Zali Steggall, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 17.
“It's how this country has grown, innovated and connected to the world. It's how small businesses thrive. It's how regional towns survive. And it is how we will address the challenges of the future. Responsible migration must be done with honesty, compassion and fairness, not political point scoring and fearmongering. We know, for example, that many in this place seek to blame the housing crisis on immigration. We have to remember that temporary migrants, students and skilled workers are not the cause of our housing challenges or cost-of-living pressures. They are structural issues built on decades of underinvestment and poor planning. They require long-term solutions, such as investment in housing, reduction of incentives for housing as an investment and workforce training.”
“It has become a hot topic in this place once again, and it is used to explain away other policy failings when it comes to key areas, such as housing. We've seen the coalition seize immigration yet again. It's out of their usual playbook to sow fear and division within our community, to blame others for the problems that have evolved out of poor policy and to pit Australians against one another and against those who might change the situation. They've used immigration to reduce complex policy discussions into simplistic slogans and populist approach. It's deeply disappointing. Immigration has been one of Australia's great strengths. Our incredible country is built on it. Other than First Australians—Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples—we are all immigrants of one shape or another.”
“For some people, it is actually that in-person hearing that enables them to properly express or raise their issue or concern. Those affected, including international students, temporary workers and families, may not have the language skills or resources to present complex cases in writing. Without the chance to be heard in person, many valid cases may well fall through the cracks, so I am concerned about the amendment. I appreciate it is done with the idea of efficiently dealing with the complex backlog and workload, but we have to make sure that we don't, in the process, undermine the very principle of what the ART was established to achieve. We know immigration is frequently used in politics in Australia as a very divisive political football.”
“So the ART replaced the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the Immigration Assessment Authority. The objectives were to be user focused, efficient, accessible and fair. I am concerned that the amendments proposed by the Attorney-General undermine the objectives of the ART. The bill before the House now, the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, includes two concerning provisions. It gives the tribunal a broad discretion to dispense with hearings where it considers it appropriate and reasonable to do so, and it requires that certain migration matters, such as student visa refusals and prescribed temporary visa decisions, must be reviewed only on the papers, without any oral hearing. For me, that is concerning, because the papers can often be a difficult way of doing it.”
“We work with local businesses who are struggling to find staff and look to international students and qualified foreigners to fill these gaps. A local business, the Fur Salon, reached out to our office, desperately seeking the finalisation of visas for three key staff members without whom they would have been forced to close their doors. After advocacy from our office to the department, these visas were granted, but delays in processing caused certain unnecessary stress. The Administrative Review Tribunal is incredibly important because it is the final point when our system is being challenged, and often it is in relation to immigration and visas. The Administrative Review Tribunal was established 12 months ago as a result of the review into the very faulty and difficult Administrative Appeals Tribunal.”
“The Administrative Review Tribunal is an important element of our judicial system, to provide an independent mechanism of review of administrative decisions. It is central to ensuring fairness, transparency and accountability in government decision-making. Immigration has again become a political football, as all too often it does in Australia, and this must be resisted. Small businesses, regional communities and universities across Australia rely on a fair, efficient and humane immigration system, and the Administrative Review Tribunal plays a really important part in that processing ecosystem. Every day, my office receives correspondence from people in our local community trying to navigate the complex visa system.”
“That includes actors, producers, directors, writers and voice actors, all of whom tell our homegrown stories. Many of them are here today in the gallery, and I want to thank them for their strong advocacy. Countries such as Canada, France, Denmark, Italy and Spain have introduced local content rules, or are in the process of negotiating them, to protect their screen industry. It's time for Australia to do the same. Streamers are using the publicly funded NBN to deliver their product; we should ensure that there are Australian made stories. I call on the Prime Minister and Minister Burke to deliver on their commitment and legislate for streaming platforms to have quotas for Australian content.”
“Last month, I hosted a roundtable with constituents from the Australian screen industry. All were deeply concerned at the lack of local content rules for streaming services, which is resulting in a lack of investment in Australian stories. The screen industry has seen an estimated 60 per cent reduction in work, and this puts around 55,000 jobs at risk. After listening to their stories and hearing the impacts on their livelihoods, a petition was started to call on the government to deliver on their election promises—in 2022 and 2025, and earlier, in 2019—to legislate local content requirements for streaming services. The campaign has struck a chord. Australians love Australian stories, which is why nearly 12,000 people have now signed, showing their support.”
“From mine countermeasures and clearance diving to hydrographic surveying and disaster response, their work safeguards not just defence operations but the very lifelines of our economy and our regional partnerships. I also want to acknowledge the Navy Clearance Diver Trust, a not-for-profit organisation that supports current and former clearance divers and their families. These men and women perform some of the most demanding roles in the Navy and too many face injury and mental health challenges after service. It's essential that as a nation we better support our veterans to ensure they receive the care, respect and support they deserve.”
“Our Navy is essential to Australia's national security and defence sovereign capability and industrial strength. Last week, I had the privilege of visiting HMAS Waterhen and HMAS Penguin , both based in Warringah. It was an incredible opportunity to see firsthand the Royal Australian Navy's vital contribution to our national defence, our sovereign capability and to the science and technology that underpin it. As an island nation, Australia's prosperity and security rely heavily on open and secure sea lanes. A strong, agile and well-resourced navy is essential to protecting our national interests and ensuring our sovereignty. At Waterhen and Penguin , the teams of the Mine Warfare, Clearance Diving and Geospatial Force demonstrate extraordinary professionalism, skill and dedication.”
“My question is to the Prime Minister. Will you implement without delay Australian local content quotas for streaming services, as promised in 2019, 2022 and again in 2025, to help save the 55,000 jobs in the Australian screen industry?”
“The bill is a step forward towards embedding that preparation in our national framework, and so I commend the bill to the House.”
“It is critically important that special consideration be given. Finally, public communication must be a cornerstone. Clear, consistent and accessible communication is vital. It must be available to all communities in all languages to make sure we truly have a CDC that works for the multicultural and diverse Australia. All communities, all Australians, must have confidence that the CDC is working and really looking out for everyone's health. Ultimately, this bill establishing a CDC is about lessons learned. The pandemic showed us what happens when science, communication and community willpower align. It also showed what happens when we don't—fear, confusion and division. The next crisis might look different, but the principle remains the same.”
“So it's so important that this CDC, to genuinely serve the Australian people, be robustly independent of the government of the day so that there can be no question of public service in terms of the public interest and better good. It has to be fearless advice. We must have the ability to invest in data integration, which is already contemplated in the bill, to ensure the linking of environmental health and demographic data to provide early warning systems to emerging health threats. Of course, we also need to be mindful that First Nations Australians need to be a priority in these considerations, working alongside these communities to recognise the unique challenges First Nations Australians face in relation to their health and in relation to environmental change and health resilience.”
“It must have robust independence and transparency over appointments to ensure integrity and build trust with the community around its work and effectiveness. We have seen the impact of politicisation of appointments to the CDC in the United States. The appointment of Robert F Kennedy Jr to head of health has replaced science with ideology, and the ripple effect of this will negatively impact the health of Americans and will be felt for years, but it will also have an impact in Australia and around the world. We're seeing the withdrawal of funding from science and research, and that will have catastrophic consequences for so many.”
“In New South Wales, heat related deaths may rise by some 444 per cent under the scenario of an increase of three degrees, which we are, sadly, on track for. Bushfire smoke and other air pollution are driving higher rates of respiratory disease and asthma. So it's clear that, if we want a comprehensive health approach, these issues have to be addressed by the CDC as well. Establishing an Australian CDC provides an opportunity to build a proactive, integrated and independent health protection system. For this to be effective, we must ensure that it is science led, nationally coordinated, future focused, community connected and globally engaged. To do this, the implementation will be the key. The CDC must be properly funded and staffed by qualified public health professionals.”
“I dearly wish for the same scientifically backed approach that we took with COVID-19 to be taken with other risks, particularly in relation to climate change and the risk to health that that poses. I call on the government to ensure that this is also the focus of the CDC, because the national climate risk assessment highlights that climate change will have a severe impact on our health and social support system by as early as 2050 unless we can mitigate and address it and invest in preparation for it. Heatwaves are an enduring feature of Australia's climate and have significant social, health and economic impacts. Rising temperatures are increasing the incidence of heat related illnesses, cardiovascular stress and dehydration, especially among older Australians, outdoor workers and the more vulnerable.”
“The frontline services and health professionals that worked tirelessly around the clock really showed just how much we as a society need to value the importance of those frontline services and health professionals. Before COVID-19, Australia's public health system was largely state based and fragmented. I think COVID-19 really exposed the gaps in not having a single coordinated body. While we fared better than many other nations, it was due to an evidence based direction informed by our top medical officers. I know that wasn't always easy, so I very much thank them. The health impacts of climate change are among the most significant and growing threats facing Australians.”
“She helped to keep the community informed and calm during a time of turbulence and uncertainty. Her loss is very deeply felt. This bill in many ways honours her legacy of science based, transparent public health leadership. I would also like to thank, from my office, Julie Giannesini, an electorate officer in my team who has been with me for six years. She worked tirelessly during the COVID pandemic to assist so many people within my community with urgent visas and exemption requests around business and personal travel arrangements, sick parents, attending funerals, and people stranded around the world. Her incredible work was recognised and appreciated by so many in my community. I want to make sure that is on the record. Of course, so many helped during that time.”
“Australians overwhelmingly accepted curtailing their freedoms on the basis of expert medical advice to keep the more vulnerable in our communities safe, and that was so incredibly important. I have to note that, while I know the nation had the effort of her expertise, in particular the community in Warringah and I had the assistance of the incredible Professor Mary-Louise McLaws, an extraordinary epidemiologist who gave clarity and calm amid chaos. She was an invaluable source of information and support for me personally, for the Warringah community and, I think, for Australia at large, helping us understand such complex facts and situations. She helped us understand what was happening and why and what we could do to mitigate it. She took the time to explain the complex concepts in clear terms.”
“I was in parliament during the COVID-19 pandemic, and I saw firsthand the upheaval within our communities and the frustration at the inconsistency across our country—it was a unique system; there were seven different policies across different states and territories—in our response to COVID-19. One of the things that will always stand out for me, and that I welcomed, was the fact that decisions of government, of premiers and of the Prime Minister were made with scientific evidence and fact. Those images of doctors and chief medical officers standing next to premiers and the Prime Minister to inform advice absolutely helped save lives. They built the social licence and the acceptance from the vast majority of our communities in such incredibly difficult and important times.”
“I commend the government for implementing this as a matter of urgency during this term of government and for progressing this very important organisation. The COVID-19 pandemic showed just how critical clear, science based communication, information and coordination are to policy responses. A CDC will play a vital role in preventing and responding to future pandemics and in addressing the growing health impacts of many other challenges, in particular from our changing climate. I very much support the amendments proposed by the member for Mackellar and the member for Kooyong because they will strengthen the transparency, integrity and focus of the CDC to ensure Australians can have trust in this very important institution.”
“I rise to speak on the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 and the Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025. This is essential and very important. These bills will establish the Australians Centre for Disease Control, a long overdue and essential step to strengthen our national public health preparedness. I actually called for this during the 2022 election, and the crossbench engaged with the minister for health, disability and ageing in the last parliament on the establishment of this agency. Key in that consultation process were discussions around, for example, where it should be based to make sure it genuinely is a national centre for disease control.”
“We need migration systems to be fair, efficient and focused on supporting Australian businesses and communities. I've met with many local businesses that are struggling under the cost, the delay and the lack of timeliness when it comes to sponsored visas and having an immigration system that will work to address skill shortages. So I urge the government to really address that. The high operating costs, critical labour shortages and long visa-processing times for small businesses that need immediate relief when it comes to staff are simply untenable. We have complex visa rules and we have slow processing, so I urge the government to assist with that and I ask the minister, given the importance of migration, what the government will do to improve the system. (Time expired)”
“My question to the minister is: given the escalating costs of disasters, which are now $38 billion a year, can you clarify the government's decision-making process in allocating funding to NEMA, and will you commit to increasing the proportion of funding directed to disaster preparedness and resilience so that we invest in adaptation upfront rather than paying many times over in recovery? Secondly, in my time remaining, I'd like to address immigration. There is much scaremongering done in this place around immigration. The reality is that it is too often a political attack line or a scapegoat for economic challenges that are due to poor management over the years. The reality is that immigration is a driver for growth, innovation and community strength.”
“The budget also includes $1.2 billion just for disaster payments following Cyclone Alfred, with overall recovery costs expected to reach $13.5 billion. The imbalance is just so stark. We're spending billions after disasters occur but only a fraction on preparation and risk reduction. Less than 13 per cent of NEMA's budget is in fact directed towards preparedness, yet CSIRO research shows that every $1 spent on disaster preparation will save $11 on recovery costs. This would be good economic management. Without scaling up NEMA's resilience funding, we are condemning communities to relive the same trauma, disaster after disaster.”
“In 2022, the government created the National Emergency Management Agency to bring together disaster response, recovery and resilience into one agency. NEMA leads the Commonwealth crisis management efforts, coordinates emergency responses, funds disaster recovery and community support, and overseas resilience initiatives such as the Disaster Ready Fund. It was intended to be the Commonwealth centre of excellence for disaster resilience and management, yet the funding does not match the scale of the challenge. In the 2025-26 budget, NEMA received $188 million over four years for operations. The Disaster Ready Fund will provide $200 million per year for resilience projects—totalling $1 billion over five years. Think about that: $200 million per year to address the costs of some $38 billion in damages per year. The contrast is stark.”
“The Northern Beaches is now one of the most climate risk exposed areas in the country, carrying the highest emergency services levy, through the LGA, in New South Wales. Australia is now one of the most exposed continents in the world to natural disasters. Since 2022, there have been 166 declared natural disasters, impacting more than half of our local government areas. Cyclone Alfred alone is estimated to have cost $13.5 billion for about a week of disruption. Each year, natural disasters are costing Australians around $38 billion. Communities are being devastated again and again, and insurance is becoming unaffordable. If we want to protect lives and livelihoods, as the Home Affairs portfolio is tasked to do, we need to be ambitious and accountable in investing in adaptation and resilience, and that is what NEMA is for.”
“The Home Affairs portfolio is responsible for the National Emergency Management Agency, NEMA. They are, in essence, our domestic security when it comes to escalating climate risks. Many talk of defending and keeping Australians safe, but there is certainly a side of politics that doesn't want to acknowledge this very increasing and real risk. While the costs of disaster recovery climbs, we are still failing to invest adequately in adaptation and resilience, and that was visible in the appropriation bill. In Warringah, we see firsthand the impact of extreme weather events. From coastal erosion along our beaches and rising home insurance costs, extreme weather losses are up 67 per cent from the previous five years.”
“With better design, the instant asset write-off can be a powerful tool towards our national decarbonisation efforts and lifting productivity through small businesses. So these amendments, like others, support both business growth and Australia's long-term economic resilience. It's about providing certainty and fairness, not shifting goalposts. So I commend these amendments to the government and urge the government to consider much greater support for small to medium enterprises. Question negatived. Bill agreed to.”
“I urge the government to consider: if not through these amendments, how, through other measures, do we incentivise small to medium businesses to innovate and to build resilience within themselves? We need to ensure that they have access to ways to build energy efficiency in their operations but also to build waste management. We know we need to build towards more of a circular economy and ensure that that waste management is there. I've had the privilege of spending time with small businesses within my electorate. They're ambitious, hardworking and innovative. They deserve tax frameworks that reward innovation and support cleaner, more efficient technologies. Under the current arrangements, it shifts every budget cycle, which risks missing the opportunity to help small businesses be part of the clean energy transition.”
“So for small businesses there's a real benefit in being incentivised to act to reduce that risk and invest in those efficiencies for their buildings and in the ability to act now to protect their energy sources and ensure they can build resilience in their business and continue to operate in the face of rising temperatures and increasing risks. So these amendments would incentivise small businesses and deliver real benefits by allowing small businesses to invest in energy efficiency and decarbonisation options to reduce the costs of doing business. For example, the cost of utilities is a key driver of stress for small to medium enterprises. The amendments would allow for investment in productivity enhancement, and they would simplify tax compliance, removing the confusion of annual threshold changes.”
“These come in so many ways that the write-off would essentially be available to most businesses and industries, but it gives small business that incentive and that encouragement to spend that money in a really purposeful way. We know from the national climate risk assessment that small businesses across Australia will face notable impacts and increasing risks from climate change. They will potentially face compounding impacts from inundation, flooding and erosion, making them unviable, particularly in high-risk areas across Queensland, WA, the Northern Territory and New South Wales. Often, small businesses also struggle to get insurance because of the amount of risk they carry when it comes to climate impacts.”
“In relation to the instant asset tax write-off, it's raising the question of how it is used for small businesses. In the past, there has been concern that the instant tax write-off has been used for, essentially, spending by some businesses—for example, the paying of the RAM tradie utes. We've seen them proliferate in some of our areas. So it's looking at the question of how small business can be incentivised to invest into energy efficiency and waste reduction, because these are key elements that the government ends up spending significant amounts of money on in other programs. So these amendments seek to justify the increase to $50,000 for that instant asset tax write-off by linking it to waste reduction and energy efficiency measures for small businesses.”
“by leave—I move amendments (1) and (3) as circulated in my name together: (1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 9), omit "Schedules 6 and 7", substitute "Schedules 6 to 8". (3) Page 99 (after line 15), at the end of the Bill, add: Schedule 8 Income Tax (Transitional Provisions) Act 1997 1 At the end of section 328-180 Add: Increased access linked to waste reduction or energy efficiency (7) Despite any other provision of this Act, section 328-180 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 applies in relation to: (a) an increased access year beginning after 30 June 2025; and (b) a depreciating asset between $20,000 and $50,000; only if the depreciating asset would reduce waste or be covered by the energy incentive in section 328-465 if the appropriate change were made to that section.”
“That's why my amendment seeks to make the instant asset write-off permanent and increases the threshold to $50,000 so that businesses have got a meaningful ability to invest in their businesses. I commend the amendment to the House.”
“When the amendment was before the House in the 2023-24 financial year, leading professional bodies, including the CPA, the Tax Institute of Australia and the Mortgage and Finance Association of Australia, all called for the instant asset tax write-off measure to be made permanent. Permanency would reduce red tape for business, government and tax agents. While the government deserves credit for continuing the scheme, it's time to stop treating this as a temporary fix. Small businesses need long-term certainty. Also, the current $20,000 threshold does not provide the economic stimulus needed for small businesses to have confidence to grow and invest.”
“In the last term of parliament, it passed on pretty much the very last sitting day, which was only a short period of time before the end of the financial year and which meant there was no ability for a business to genuinely look to this measure to invest in their business and boost their productivity. There is a high-stakes roadmap. At a time when Australia needs policy settings that help to boost productivity and growth, we should be looking at ways to enhance investment by local businesses. The proposal to extend this doesn't provide the certainty that businesses need.”
“According to MYOB, who assist so many small businesses, nearly 60 per cent of small business would support a permanent instant asset tax write-off because the uncertainty undermines the confidence small businesses need to invest in their business. So if the government were genuine in their desire to assist small business, it would accept this amendment, because we have been calling on the government to make this instant asset write-off permanent for sometime. In the last two parliaments, we've seen this kicked around like a political football, and the people paying the price are small businesses. They are the ones who cannot invest in their business with certainty because they don't know whether the legislation will ultimately pass.”
“Usually it is for a limited time, and the thresholds keep changing. It's now at $20,000. When it was originally introduced, it was actually $150,000, but now it's back to $20,000 and is drip fed with the legislation every 12 months to extend the measure. The amendment I move is to make this instant asset write-off permanent so that businesses can in fact have the certainty of knowing they can invest in their business, in innovation and efficiencies, ahead of time. The amendment increases it to an amount that is actually meaningful for small businesses to allow them to actually invest and boost their productivity. We know that nearly four million small businesses rely on this, and they want this. They want this to be at the $50,000 mark, and they want it to be permanent.”
“6 Paragraph 328-180(5)(e) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (e) were a reference to $50,000, if the amount is so included at any time on or after 1 July 2023. 7 Paragraph 328-180(6)(e) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (e) were a reference to $50,000, in relation to a deduction for an income year that ends on or after 1 July 2023. This amendment is in relation to schedule 7, in relation to the instant asset write-off, which was first introduced as a stimulus measure some years ago. It is a practical way to boost cash flow and support investment, but, over the years, it has become a vital business planning tool. The problem is there's no ability for business to actually plan with this tool because there is no consistency. Each year it's implemented it is prey to politicking and becomes a political football. And it has changed over time.”
“I move: (2) Schedule 7, page 132 (line 1) to page 132 (line 13), omit the Schedule, substitute: Schedule 7 — instant asset write-off for small business entities Income Tax (Transitional Provisions) Act 1997 1 Section 328-180 (heading) Omit "to 30 June 2025". 2 Subsection 328-180(1) (definition of increased access year ) Repeal the definition, substitute: increased access year : an income year is an increased access year if any day of the year occurs on or after 12 May 2015. 3 Subsection 328-180(4) Omit " Temporary increase ", substitute " Increase ". 4 Paragraph 328-180(4)(d) Omit "$20,000", substitute "50,000". 5 Paragraph 328-180(4)(d) Omit "and on or before 30 June 2025" (wherever occurring).”
“So what we need is that certainty and an instant asset write-off that is scalable to the challenge and costs that small businesses are incurring. If we want a strong, ambitious and productive economy where companies and small businesses are encouraged to invest and innovate, then we need to provide certainty, fairness and a regulatory framework that assists us, not shifting goalposts.”
“We need companies to be able to invest and innovate—companies of all sizes—but too often the ear of government is only for big business. They have that scale and ability to deal that small and medium businesses do not. So it was disappointing there wasn't a bigger focus in the Treasurer's productivity roundtable on how we're going to support small and medium businesses to innovate and invest. I would say, respectfully, that the instant asset write-off levelled at $20,000 is just not going do it. It doesn't cut it. All that does is allow for the write-off of a small investment in an asset for a small business. It doesn't really allow a business to invest in better technology, significant sustainability or waste management, or innovation within a business.”
“Local operators have shared their concerns as well, with the GST threshold remaining at $75,000 for small businesses since 2007 without indexation, which has added extra burden as costs continues to rise. That compliance cost is something that small businesses continually raise. So, whilst this amendment to try and make this instant asset write-off again for one year is good, the government seems to be completely deaf to the concerns small businesses have and their continued challenge when it comes to meeting the administrative burden but also the additional cost. We want to have a strong, ambitious and productive economy. We've heard a lot from the government and the Treasurer about that, but we're not hearing a lot about how to help small businesses achieve that.”
“It's being felt all across Australia but more acutely in regional communities, where small businesses drive local economies and the pool of available labour is even smaller. So you would think that they would come in this place or before the media and champion support for more skilled immigration and more workers to come in and support small businesses, but no. In fact, it's quite the opposite. What small businesses have raised with me are concerns around the complexity and cost of the current visa process, the complexity of the tax systems for small businesses and the burden of successive legislation that's been passed by the Albanese government. Our skilled worker visas can take up to eight months to process, which is far too long for a small business trying to meet immediate demand and fill a role.”
“Requiring energy efficiency and waste reduction in small business is an important part of this puzzle. We know small businesses are the lifeblood of so many communities, and Warringah is the same. Recently, I've had the pleasure of meeting with local small businesses across Manly to discuss the staffing and other regulatory changes they are facing. Our local businesses are facing the perfect storm, grappling with higher costs, tight margins and slowing consumer demand alongside an inability to find workers to fill key roles. Whether it's a chef, waitress, landscaper, childcare worker or bus driver, across so many industries, businesses are struggling. The growing shortage of skilled workers is hurting our local businesses' ability to grow and serve the community. This is not just being felt in Warringah.”
“I support the member for Mackellar's call in how we can help small business by having a 20 per cent tax-free threshold for small business and to make the instant asset write-off permanent, and I will come to that in a moment. The instant asset write-off extension is welcome, but, again, it is too low, and the government needs to provide certainty by ensuring that it be permanent. I will be introducing an amendment during consideration in detail, before the third reading, to make it permanent. I'd also like it extended to a level that actually reflects the needs of small businesses, that makes it meaningful in assisting them with their investment within their small businesses and their assets. We need to also ensure we are incentivising small businesses to become more effective and efficient, to reduce waste.”
“In respect of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Strengthening Financial Systems and Other Measures) Bill 2025, there is a particular schedule that I want to focus on, and that is schedule 7. Schedule 7 extends the 20,000 instant asset write-off for small businesses to June 2026. What we are seeing, again, is this eking out, this drip feeding to small business the support they so desperately need year to year to year, rather than finally making this permanent. Rather than giving small business some certainty so that they can manage their cash flow and their commitments knowing that something has been legislated, what we've seen, during the last term of government and this term, is this constant uncertainty.”
“The government continues to tweak the operation of the Scams Prevention Framework, but I point out that there has been no movement to implement any of the regulatory rules that would put the Scams Prevention Framework into action. We've been contacted by local constituents who are being impersonated and scammed online without any recourse or ability to use the framework that was passed in this place earlier this year. It was supposed to be implemented by July 2025, and we are still waiting, so I call on the government to implement those rules without further delay.”