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 14 of 17.
“I seconded the motion of the member for Wentworth, and I thank her for her advocacy, but really I wish we did not need to put such a motion forward, because better progress—more progress—from the government is desperately needed on this issue. In Warringah, more than 450 domestic and family violence assaults were reported in the last year. When we talk to our local police, they will say that domestic and family violence is the No. 1 issue for which they are called out. Nationally, the picture is simply devastating. Whilst we have the Status of women report card identifying 37 women killed in 2024, unfortunately other metrics will often say that the number is even greater. Australian Femicide Watch puts the number as high as 103 women and 16 children killed.”
“On the whole, the amendments are a welcome step in the right direction, but the stakes are high. I can't stress it enough. Laws alone are not enough. We must match legislative reform with enforcement, education and a nationally coordinated campaign if we want to protect young Australians from addiction with vaping. I commend this bill but urge the government to show much greater ambition when it comes to tackling the scourge of vaping, because nothing is more important than the health of our children and our communities.”
“This is incredibly toxic, and it's incredibly important that we quickly counter that with information. The government urgently needs to do a national campaign to warn against the dangers of vaping and the chemicals included. Andie's research shows that vaping harms extend well beyond the individual user, and this is so widespread. It affects our homes, our schools and the wider community. It really is a health menace. The government's actions with this bill are welcome, but so much more needs to be done to ensure that vaping does not entrench itself like tobacco has done in the past. Otherwise, we'll continue to see the health costs and harms escalating, and communities will lose faith that the government has an intention to protect health and the health of our communities.”
“For example, you've vaped in your car thinking you're doing it before picking up the kids from school, it's safe and you're not giving them any kind of second-hand smoke. Then you pick them up—maybe you pick them up from child care. You put the baby in the car seat. In that car seat, they will maybe touch the surfaces in the car around them and put their fingers in their mouth. That is third-hand impact. What they are seeing is that residue is incredibly toxic. Not only is there a danger to those around you of firsthand and second-hand vaping; there's third-hand, where it has left a residue in the place where it has been consumed. What it's showing is that the chemicals linger on surfaces, impacting lung function, immunity and even, in situations of pregnancy, the embryo.”
“In the past we've had strong anti-smoking campaigns to help educate Australians on those health risks and warnings. Where are the similar vaping campaigns? They are just missing, and this is a spot where the federal government must step into that responsibility. In fact, I had a meeting that was so sobering with a young Warringah based scientist, Andie Thorpe—an amazing young woman. She's been identified through STEM projects, and she's doing the most incredible research, but it was just horribly sobering. She is studying third-hand vaping. I would question how many people realise that vaping leaves a residue where you have vapes. If it's internally, in a car, house or any room, it leaves a residue on every surface.”
“Further, we need more transparency, data around who is been provided with vapes and reporting on enforcement outcomes so communities know that action is being taken where it is needed. We need education campaigns in schools and in workplaces to counter this industry marketing, and we need to protect children. Too many do not think of vaping in the same way as they think of smoking. They do not understand that it is as bad—this is as bad for your health, community and children. The Youth Vaping Education Campaign in 2024 was good, but it must continue in our schools, and it needs to be amplified. Where is the national campaign on our screens telling people not to vape—that vaping is as dangerous and as harmful to your health as tobacco?”
“They need national enforcement, penalties and education. The wider issue here remains protecting young Australians from addiction. I actually recently had the opportunity to speak to some of our area commanders, from a policing point of view, and there was a real concern about lack of resources to properly police tobacco concerns. We need implementation of greater accountability for retailers and distributors who continue to sell vapes illegally; consideration of a nationwide licence for tobacconists with stricter compliance and oversight requirements; strengthening of penalties to deter the illegal behaviour; and properly resourced and staffed policing and enforcement capabilities.”
“Vaping have read the consumer and marketing playbook, marketed in bright colours and sweet flavours and sold illegally in rapidly emerging tobacco stores around the country. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare nearly 50 per cent of Australians aged 18 to 24 have tried e-cigarettes and vapes. In 17- to 18-year-olds it has tripled in just three years—a massive problem. Despite the 2024 vaping reforms the black market remains rampant, and the gap between legislation and enforcement continues to erode public trust. There has to be more done from a Border Force point of view and then policing and implementation. This bill introduces minor amendments that align with and add greater clarity to the existing vaping reforms. These are important progressive steps, but they must be matched with so much more.”
“The measures had worked. In 2001 about one in two people in Australia, 49 per cent, had smoked in their lifetime; 20 years later, by 2022-23, this had reduced to just one in three, 35 per cent, already a great outcome. But we need to keep pushing to do better. This was possible through world-leading measures such as plain packaging, advertising bans and tobacco excise. Unfortunately it's rebuilding. The tobacco companies have invested and moved into the vaping space, and what we're seeing is now an attack on health that is incredibly concerning. Vaping rapidly filled the gap, and there are so many misconceptions in our community about vaping. There are a number of measures that governments need to take.”
“Regularly I hear from parents, carers and other members of the community about the increasing number of these tobacco shops that are popping up just everywhere. I've talked about it at local government level; they are powerless about it because it's not a change of use, so we need a strong direction from the federal government to do something about this. My Independent colleagues at state level are pressing state government to do more to stop these tobacconists popping up everywhere, but we have to do something. People are alarmed about how this can continue to occur, especially in such close proximity to our schools, parks and childcare centres. It is clearly a targeted measure from vaping and illegal tobacco. Australia has a strong history of tackling public health issues. For years tobacco use continued to fall.”
“Schedule 1 also proposes amendments to the Therapeutic Goods Act to better manage and alleviate the consequences of medicine shortages. Critically, what I want to focus on today is schedules 2 and 3 of the bill, which strengthen legislative action against vaping by closing loopholes, strengthening enforcement and harmonising laws. The widespread availability of illegal vapes remains extremely concerning. We passed legislation during the last parliament in relation to vaping, but clearly it is not working and much more is needed. It's emerging as one of the major public health threats to Australia in our communities. Tobacconists are popping up within 300 metres of schools all over the place in our areas and communities, and it is unacceptable.”
“This bill implements minor amendments from the government's response to the Philip review by strengthening integrity measures across Medicare, pharmaceuticals and therapeutic goods. It equips regulators with stronger powers to tackle fraud, unlawful products and the growing threat of vaping. In fact, for those wanting the detail, schedule 1 of the bill aims to improve the enforcement of Medicare integrity by, first of all, changing claim timeframes for bulk-billed Medicare and dental services from two years to one year, broadening investigative powers to ensure they can be used across health benefit schemes, streamlining the pharmacy approval processes and providing greater oversight powers to obtain information about potential noncompliance.”
“These are cornerstones of our legal system, and setting them aside should be done with incredible caution. Finally, I have a real fear that the concerns I have about this process and this bill around setting aside procedural fairness have undertones of the incredibly troubling process that is occurring in the US under their ICE division. The activities there of grabbing people and having them removed from the country without procedural fairness is incredibly troubling, and we all watched that on our screens with horror, thinking how could that possibly happen in Australia? But the risk is that this legislation before the House is the very first step of the path that the Albanese government is setting on. I commend the motion to the House and urge the government to support it.”
“I want to be really clear, especially for the new members of this Labor government who will be endorsing this legislation and who may not have taken the time to properly reflect on and consider what they are endorsing. This bill raises serious human rights concerns, and must be subjected to proper scrutiny. We must not lose sight of the fact that protecting our communities and upholding human rights are not opposing goals. They can and must be pursued together. I urge the government to engage with stakeholders, to listen to the concerns of experts and advocates, and to amend this bill and agree to this motion to have it referred to the human rights committee. We must ensure that any question of legislative and retrospectively eroding principles of procedural fairness and natural justice are carefully considered.”
“We also have to ensure that our processes are robust, fair and consistent with our obligations under international human rights law. This is where appropriate, independent oversight is crucial. Without it, we risk unchecked executive power. We also need more greater transparency of the memorandum of understanding signed by the minister and the Nauru government, to understand what the Australian public are now paying for. This bill should be carefully scrutinised by the Parliamentary Joint Committee for Human Rights. With this approach it will highlight the major concerns, ensure proper consideration of any amendments needed and reaffirm procedural safeguards.”
“Procedural fairness is not a box-ticking exercise. It is a fundamental protection against error, injustice and abuse of power. It ensures that decisions are transparent, that they are evidence based, and that individuals have the right to be heard before life-changing decisions are made about them. When we weaken these principles we set a precedent that extends beyond any one group. What today is applied to noncitizens could tomorrow be normalised in other areas of law. In this case, there are grave concerns about the number of additional visa categories that will be impacted by this change. We need a better balance to ensure that we contain our strong borders and domestic security while also making sure we have appropriate consequences for all those who commit serious crimes within Australia—there is no question about that.”
“While this intention is sound, this bill has been introduced with limited explanation, limited consultation, little public discussion and little assessment of its unintended consequences and how broadly it will impact other visa categories. It has not been accompanied by the careful scrutiny and community engagement that legislation with such profound consequences deserves. The Australian Human Rights Commission, Liberty Victoria and the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre—among others—have all raised deep concerns about this bill. It must be stated that these concerns are not with the principle that serious offenders should not remain in Australia—instead, the concerns are with how the bill proposes to achieve that aim by stripping away essential safeguards of procedural fairness and natural justice in our legal system.”
“It's a serious responsibility of this parliament to consider where the balance lies between protecting our community and upholding our legal and moral obligations. This bill was introduced with the intention of strengthening border security integrity and dealing with the difficulties arising from the High Court case—specifically, to ensure that people without a right to remain here, who have committed crimes within Australia, cannot remain here. That is a legitimate and important goal. Australia absolutely has the right and responsibility to manage its borders and to decide who can remain in the country. Our communities must feel safe and our laws must protect Australians.”
“I second the motion, and I commend the member for Curtin in relation to this motion. It is a really important question, and it's incredibly disappointing to see how few members of this newly elected government are here to show interest in the types of laws that they are going to be putting their names to. This motion calls on the government to apply greater scrutiny to the Home Affairs Legislation Amendment (2025 Measures No. 1) Bill 2025 to ensure that, in removing noncitizens who have committed crimes, we do not unfairly impede fundamental human rights. In Warringah, we have a community that cares deeply about fairness and the rule of law. Over the last couple of days I've heard from many constituents—lawyers, advocates, families—who have raised serious concerns about the human rights impacts that will be raised by this bill.”
“My question is to the environment minister. Australians' plastic use has doubled since 2005, and Australians are among the world's largest users of single-use plastic. Without intervention, this figure will continue to rise. With only 14 per cent of this waste recycled, the majority of it is sent to landfill or ends up in our oceans, rivers and waterways. Plastic pollution harms the environment and human health; exposure to chemicals impacts everyone. With the negotiations on the global plastics treaty not finding consensus, will the government update our National Plastics Plan as recommended by the Drowning in w aste report?”
“I've met with Australia Post to discuss our community's concerns and will be writing to the New South Wales government to ensure there's greater accountability from them. We need to find a way to balance the need for Australia Post to maintain economically viable outlets and the access to essential services for communities, and that should be provided by national institutions like Australia Post. I commend the Kirribilli, Milsons Point and Lavender Bay precincts for their joint advocacy efforts to fight the closure or to find acceptable solutions. I want to thank Australia Post for their engagement with me on this issue, and I look forward to continuing to engage on the issue. It is important for the community to access essential services, so a solution and a compromise needs to be found.”
“I rise today to speak on behalf of the Milsons Point, Kirribilli and Lavender Bay communities, who are shocked and deeply disappointed by the decision to close the Milsons Point post office. This closure will have serious welfare impacts, particularly for elderly and disabled residents in the Greenway, James Milson Village and Port Jackson Tower housing complexes. The closure was not part of Australia Post's modernisation program. It was triggered by Transport for New South Wales's refusal to extend the lease. Instead they increased the rent to levels that were simply uneconomic for Australia Post. Transport for New South Wales did not permit community consultation or take into account the impact on community needs.”
“Students and staff must feel and trust that, when they report incidents of violence or harassment, their concerns will be taken seriously and actions will follow. So I welcome this bill, and I'm optimistic that this bill will set the groundwork to help build a safe, accountable environment for our young adults on university campuses. However, guidance and long-term investment to ensure universities are well equipped to meet these obligations remain necessary.”
“By 2020, 40 per cent of universities were operating in deficit, rising to 70 per cent in 2023, marking a significant financial downturn compared to the pre-COVID-19 and pre-job-ready-graduate years. Our university sector is struggling, and in places like ANU and now UTS we've seen students bear the brunt of the crisis. I've spoken recently in this place about the impact of the job-ready scheme on the funding model of the university sector, but the decline runs deeper, and the consequences are clear. If we're serious about ending gender based violence and ensuring safe campuses and learning environments, then the government must go further by ensuring our universities are equipped with the necessary resources, staff and stability to carry out these functions effectively.”
“It will enforce transparency and accountability, making sure that institutions follow through on their commitments to safety for their students. It has a requirement to provide evidence based prevention education and training to staff and students and consider gender based violence in recruitment and promotion decisions. In that respect, I applaud the code's whole-of-organisation approach, which ensures that institutions create safer accommodation for students, implement trauma informed support systems and use data driven methods to continually improve their response. While this bill is a welcome step to stamping out gender based violence on campuses, policy alone is not enough. Institutions need training, guidance and long-term investment to create lasting change. Since 2014, universities have faced continual financial decline.”
“It binds higher education providers to comply with the code and sets out the compliance and enforcement powers, including public disclosure of information. It also ensures that responsibility for creating a safe environment for young people on campus will not rest solely on survivors or support organisations, because addressing gender based violence in universities is a collective responsibility that involves everyone—educators, administrators, policymakers and students alike. The draft code has been released. Higher education providers will be required to take evidence based steps to prevent gender based violence on their campuses. It includes requiring vice-chancellors and CEOs to make a whole-of-organisation plan and report to their governing bodies every six months on their implementation actions.”
“I want to acknowledge the incredible importance of this, and I thank the government and the minister for acting upon this and bringing it to the forefront. It's acknowledging those survivors who have brought these issues to the fore. They've bravely shared their stories. There are advocates who have fought for justice and researchers who have provided us with the crucial insights into the prevalence and impact of gender based violence in universities. Without their ambition, resilience and determination to hold universities accountable, there would be no push towards meaningful change. This bill sets out the basic regulatory infrastructure for compliance with the National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence.”
“Lots can be said about that action plan and its lack of actual KPIs and underpinning policy to actually achieve it. In relation to this bill, I agree that it presents an opportunity to build a safer, more supportive future for students and staff in higher education. It's a commitment to ensure that our universities are environments where every individual feels secure, respected and empowered. Australia's universities are places of knowledge, growth and opportunity. They should be places of safety, too. Yet, gender based violence remains a reality for too many students and staff, so the importance of a safe and supportive higher education sector cannot be overstated. Institutions must not only provide high-quality education but also cultivate an environment where students and staff feel protected, respected and empowered.”
“Painfully, while 16 per cent of students who had been sexually harassed sought support, only three per cent of them then made a formal complaint. We know that, in this area, change has been far too slow for far too long. Student protests highlighted the ongoing inaction and inadequacies of the universities and government in addressing gender based violence on campuses. It was as a result of that mobilisation of students that we finally got some action. This bill shows a suite of other legislation arising from issues raised by the universities accord interim report and follows other safety and gender based violence initiatives, which include the creation of the National Student Ombudsman; the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education; and the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032.”
“In 2017, the Australian Human Rights Commission released Change the course: national report on sexual assault and sexual harassment at Australian universities , which shockingly revealed that one in five students experience sexual harassment in university settings. In 2021, the national safety survey reported this dropped to one in six—not much improvement. Alarmingly, one in 20 university students reported being sexually assaulted on campus. To make matters worse, this was most likely to occur with younger students. The most impacted groups were non-binary students and transgender students. I should say that I recently attended an event. It was a fantastic event by Consent Labs that was hosted by Sydney university. Their information and offerings are incredibly powerful in relation to assisting with this difficult problem.”
“I want to start by thanking all the very courageous young people who came forward with their stories of abuse, harassment and assault to ensure this issue got prominence and got acted upon. We know it is all too often incredibly hard to come forward and share those experiences. I know, as a parent, I want my young adults to be part of an educational environment where they feel secure and supported. Universities must be places where students can focus on their studies and aspirations without concerns about their safety. Whether they're on campus, online or in student accommodation, every student, regardless of gender, background or circumstance, deserves to pursue their education without fear of violence, harassment, discrimination or assault. The concerns around sexual assault on campus are unfortunately longstanding.”
“This is to the Prime Minister. The CSIRO estimates that every $1 spent on disaster preparation saves up to $11 on disaster recovery costs, yet less than 13 per cent of the National Emergency Management Agency's budget is spent on preparation and resilience. Disasters are now costing Australians $38 billion per year. Will you take this opportunity to re-evaluate funding priorities and ensure greater investment in resilience?”
“We need to start preparing. Other jurisdictions and other countries have the tools, knowledge and ability to adapt, prepare and thrive. The question now for the Albanese government is: what will they do? Will they be brave and honest enough with the Australian people and actually address these risks or remain shackled to fossil fuel interests and outdated policies? This 48th Parliament is an opportunity to protect Australia. Will the government be reckless and ignore this responsibility? I urge the government and all the new MPs who have come into this place to urge for the debate and support this Climate Change (National Framework for Adaptation) Bill 2025.”
“This bill is about certainty, independence and preparation—ensuring that future governments take climate risk seriously, regardless of who is in power. Last week we saw the Treasurer fail to address or include in his roundtable the impacts of climate change and rising risk. We cannot insure our way out of the climate crisis. We must have visibility of that national risk framework. Australia can't afford to keep reacting after disasters strike. Planning for climate impacts is crucial—it's how we protect our economy, our communities and our way of life. This bill is common sense, fiscally responsible and future focused. It's time for a reality check—climate change is here; it's costly and it's accelerating. The Nationals and the LNP don't want targets or to reduce emissions, but they're always keen for handouts when disasters strike.”
“What I heard was confronting—the scale of the risk is enormous but so is our capacity to protect ourselves if we act decisively. This bill provides us with the framework for us to get adaptation right. It provides for independent national climate change risk assessments every five years, free from political interference, publicly released and comprehensive. It provides a national adaptation plan in response to each assessment—fully funded with clear strategies, timelines and measurable outcomes, and an annual progress report to parliament, ensuring government is held accountable. Climate related reports, including declassified versions of the intelligence assessments—the ONI report—must be released to the public. The federal budget must also include climate risk costs so the economic reality is clear.”
“This was an important commitment, but now the government must legislate a national risk framework to keep our communities safe. We can still prevent the worst of catastrophic climate scenarios, but we also have to be honest with the Australian people and prepare for what is coming. We know that we have a level of climate impact already locked in due to past emissions. Adaptation is about not giving up—it's about implementing smart investment to safeguard our economy and communities. Research shows that for every $1 invested and spent on resilience, you save up to $11 on recovery costs. Yet the government continues to spend only 13 per cent of the disaster budget on resilience and adaptation. Last year, I convened a climate risk roundtable with experts, local government, industry and academics.”
“We need to know that national risk assessment. It will drive our mitigation and will inform the ambition to mitigate as fast as possible and drive investment and innovation. If the government was genuine in addressing climate risks, it would debate this bill and legislate a national risk framework. Instead, it is giving debate time for the coalition's continued climate denial. The coalition is more and more on the fringe and irrelevant when it comes to this core and essential policy debate. The question now for the government is: will it act and genuinely protect our communities or just be a little bit less bad than the coalition? In 2021, I launched Climate Act Now—a campaign to legislate net zero and a clear path to emissions reduction. It succeeded. We have legislated net zero.”
“Local governments are left bearing the increased costs of road maintenance, storm and disaster repairs, and residents are the ones who end up paying sky-high rates. We are standing at a crossroads. The Albanese government is withholding currently its one-off National Climate Risk Assessment. The report has been finished for months, and those who are familiar with the report have described its findings as 'dire', 'diabolical' and 'extremely confronting'. It contains suburb-level mapping of inundation, projections of drought, and alarming forecasts around agriculture and health. This report was meant to inform our national response and should drive an ambitious target of at least 75 per cent emissions reduction by 2035—but what we are going to have is not going to be released ahead of that target at the moment.”
“We need an independent plan grounded in evidence, transparency and accountability. Ignoring or downplaying the problem and threat does not make it go away. It just puts Australian lives at risk. In many parts of Australia, people are already living the reality of escalating climate risks, like coastal erosion, flooding and bushfires, communities and industries disrupted and spiralling insurance premiums. The New South Wales State Disaster Mitigation Plan warns that, by 2060, the Northern Beaches local government area alone could face close to $1 billion in annual damages from extreme weather. Currently disasters are costing Australia $38 billion per year and that is scheduled to double by 2060. Household costs from extreme weather impacts are set to rise from about $888 per year at the moment to $2½ thousand per year by 2050.”
“I move: That the bill be now read a second time. Today I introduce the Climate Change (National Framework for Adaptation) Bill 2025. This is landmark legislation to protect our communities, our economy and our environment from the escalating risks of climate change. This bill ensures that we have independent, regular climate risk assessments and a fully funded national adaptation plan, so that Australia is prepared, resilient and able to thrive in a changing climate. It's about keeping families safe, safeguarding livelihoods, and making sure Australia can stand strong in the face of accelerating climate risks and impacts. We cannot afford to leave our safety, our economy and our prosperity to chance or the current piecemeal, reactive approach where the government only turns up after events, keen for the photo ops.”
“It's about where we emphasise unity, neutrality and celebration of athletic excellence beyond borders and ideologies. There has been a lot of positive diplomacy and participation in the Olympics. Sport has a really strong power to unite us all, to lift us and to reflect the very best of who we are and who we can be. Politicians should not grandstand or stand in the way of athletes pursuing their dreams. I would argue they have very little idea of just what it takes to get there.”
“Then, when I try and imagine the pressure that was put on those young athletes of that 1980 team, it is just unimaginable—the distress, the pressure, their families, their friends and everyone around them. They all should have been celebrated. In the early 20th century, the father of the modern Olympic Games, Pierre de Coubertin, wrote that the competition ought to be free from political interference. That purpose is also reflected in the 1958 Olympic Charter. I know that can be difficult at times, especially when nations and human rights are being ignored and there are calls to try and use the audience of an Olympic Games to highlight that. But we have to think of the Olympic Games as highlighting it for good. It is a platform and an arena where we want to celebrate the best of humanity and all that is possible.”
“As an Olympic athlete myself, I absolutely know the sacrifice and the dedication you have to go through to qualify for the Olympics. What it requires is perseverance through many highs and lows. In the media we tend to celebrate the highs, right? When it works, when everything goes well, we see that, and the Australian public recognises it. But there are many other dark times, hard times, where you really have to be resilient to continue to push through. There is immense pressure and dedication that goes into continuing, and all too often that is on very young people. I had the opportunity to participate in my first Olympics when I was only 17 years of age. The pressure and the momentousness of that occasion, when I look back on it now at a higher age, I think was just extraordinary—to be so young and to have such an opportunity.”
“There has been a dark shadow cast over those Olympic Games, and it should not reduce the success and the efforts of the Australian team. The team came home with nine medals: two golds, two silver and five bronze. Two gold were in the swimming, for Michelle Ford in the women's 800-metre freestyle and for the men's 4x100 medley. These were Australia's first gold medals since the Munich Olympics of 1972. This should have been a cause for celebration, and I can't help but wonder what would have been if we had had the full team there. There was no fanfare and no 'welcome home' parade and our athletes were shunned by sections of the Australian public. That is shameful, because that is the public that is putting upon them their feelings, and it just should not happen.”
“A week before they were due to go, the federation made the choice that they would not attend, that that sport would not participate. She had her uniform—the Australian Olympic blazer and the whole kit—but was never able to put it on. She was in tears talking about it. Even yesterday she wasn't sure whether she should have been there, whether she belonged in that moment of recognition, because we were also pointing out the lack of welcome home we gave the athletes that did go and participate. Yesterday was a moment for that whole team to finally feel united and recognised as a whole team, to thank those that did Australia proud and, in particular, to celebrate the incredible sporting achievements of those who competed.”
“I'm really grateful to have the opportunity to speak now, and also yesterday, to some of the members of that team who were so wrongly put in the crossfire of politics. The intense public pressure not to compete continues to hurt many of those athletes. There were tears yesterday when people told me of their experiences—both going and not getting the opportunity to go. I acknowledge that devastation for those athletes, what they experienced and continue to experience. I hope that with yesterday's moment there was finally a moment to celebrate that entire team—those who went and those who didn't go. I talked to one member who spoke of being part of the women's hockey team. It was going to be historic—the first ever women's team to participate—and they were favourites to do very well.”
“Many sporting federations and individual athletes were pressured into withdrawing, sacrificing dreams and years of dedication. Grateful to have the opportunity, others who went were met with incredible treatment by the Australian people and were never celebrated in the way they should have been. To be selected on an Olympic team is such an incredible opportunity, a dream. It's the culmination of so many years of training and sacrifice. To have that dream and ambition tarred and marred by so many others—externals—who have no real comprehension of what it has taken to get to that point is incredibly frustrating and sad. I think it's a moment in Australian history that we need to learn from and make sure we don't repeat.”
“I was deeply moved yesterday by the attendance of the 1980 Moscow Olympic team in the chamber. I thank the Prime Minister for acknowledging the incredible sadness and weight the actions of our nation and the politicisation of the participation in the Moscow Olympics had on so many people—those who went, those who didn't go and those who were prevented from going. The lead-up to the Moscow Olympics was one of the most difficult periods for Australian athletes. The Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan disrupted their moment of pride, turning a celebration of athletic competition into a battleground of political tension. There was intense pressure from the Australian government, sporting administrators and so many commentators pushing for a boycott of the Games. The Australian Olympic Committee voted narrowly to attend.”
“So I would argue that AACAP is an incredibly valuable program. It delivers real outcomes, builds stronger communities and builds our Defence Force capabilities. I was quite shocked to hear that, despite its success, AACAP may not continue. It has not been funded past 2026. It is a co-partnership between Defence and Prime Minister and Cabinet, and so I am calling on the government to ensure it continues to be funded. The year 2027 would be its 30th anniversary and, at the moment, it's up in the air whether or not this incredible program will continue. I want to thank all those that I spoke to for their incredible service and for sharing their experiences with me.”
“It's a big sacrifice in an environment where I can say there were no luxuries. We slept on camp beds and we were in the same conditions that the defence personnel are in. The Productivity Commission's Closing the Gap report shows that we're only on track to meet four of 19 targets when it comes to First Nations Australians' disadvantage, and health outcomes remain incredibly concerning. There are minimal gains in health assessments and declining use of GPs and chronic disease management services. Nearly 25 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are unable to access dental care when needed, and costs remain a massive barrier, with 10 per cent unable to afford a dental visit. As you can imagine, on these islands the cost of everything was exacerbated by remoteness.”